2019 Wasted Food Report
Estimates of generation and
management of wasted food in the
United States in 2019
April 2023
EPA 530-R-23-005
&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
-------
Contents
Executive Summary iv
1 Background 1
2 Scope and Terminology 1
3 Generation of Wasted Food 2
4 Management of Wasted Food 8
4.1 Sector-by-Sector Summary 14
4.1.1 Food Manufacturing and Processing Sector 14
4.1.2 Food Retail Sector 15
4.1.3 Food Service Sector 16
4.1.4 Residential Sector 16
4.1.5 Food Banks 17
4.2 Pathway-By-Pathway Summary 18
4.2.1 Food Donation 18
4.2.2 Animal Feed 19
4.2.3 Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing 20
4.2.4 Anaerobic Digestion 21
4.2.5 Composting 22
4.2.6 Land Application 23
4.2.7 Controlled Combustion 24
4.2.8 Landfill 25
4.2.9 Sewer/Wastewater Treatment 26
4.3 Overall Summary of Generation and Management of Wasted Food 26
5 Progress Toward the U.S. 2030 Food Loss and Waste Reduction Goal 27
6 Comparison with 2018 Methodology and Estimates 27
7 Caveats and Uncertainties 33
8 References 34
9 Appendix 38
9.1 Glossary 38
9.2 Sector-Specific References 40
9.2.1 Food Manufacturing and Processing Sector 40
9.2.2 Residential Sector 40
9.2.3 Food Retail Sector 43
9.2.4 Food Service Sector 44
9.3 Detailed Generation and Management Estimates of Wasted Food 49
9.4 State Composting Estimates 51
-------
List of Tables
Table 1. Average Wasted Food Generation Factors (2019) 4
Table 2. Extrapolation Bases for Wasted Food Generation Estimates (2019) 5
Table 3. Estimated Annual Wasted Food Generation for the Food Retail, Food Service and Residential Sectors
(2019) 7
Table 4. Estimated Annual Wasted Food Generation forthe Food Manufacturing and Processing Sector (2019)
8
Table 5. Quantity of Wasted Food Managed by the Food Retail, Food Service, and Residential Sectors Based
on Revised Management Profile (2019) 12
Table 6. Quantity of Wasted Food Managed by the Manufacturing and Processing Sector Based on Revised
Management Profile (2019) 12
Table 7. Progress Toward the 2030 Goal Compared to 2016 Baseline 27
Table 8. Comparison of 2018 and 2019 Wasted Food Generation Estimates 30
Table 9. Comparison of 2018 and 2019 Wasted Food Management Estimates for the Food Retail, Food
Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors 31
Table 10. Comparison of 2018 and 2019 Wasted Food Management Estimates for the Food Manufacturing
and Processing Sector 32
Table 11. Generation and Management Estimates of Wasted Food by Sector and Category (2019) 49
Table 12. State Composting Estimates (2019) 51
ii
-------
List of Figures
Figure 1. Percentage Distribution of Wasted Food Generation from the Food Retail, Food Service and
Residential Sectors (2019) 8
Figure 2. Percentage Distribution of Wasted Food Managed by the Food Retail, Food Service, and Residential
Sectors (2019) 13
Figure 3. Percentage Distribution of Wasted Food Managed by the Manufacturing and Processing Sector
(2019) 14
Figure 4. Food Manufacturing and Processing Sector Wasted Food Management Profile (2019) 15
Figure 5. Food Retail Sector Wasted Food Management Profile (2019) 16
Figure 6. Food Service Sector Wasted Food Management Profile (2019) 16
Figure 7. Residential Sector Wasted Food Management Profile (2019) 17
Figure 8. Food Bank Food Waste Management Profile (2019) 18
Figure 9. Food Donation Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, and Residential Sectors) (2019) 19
Figure 10. Animal Feed Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors) (2019).... 20
Figure 11. Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and
Food Bank Sectors) (2019) 21
Figure 12. Anaerobic Digestion Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors) (2019)
22
Figure 13. Composting Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors) (2019) 23
Figure 14. Land Application Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors) (2019)
24
Figure 15. Controlled Combustion Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors)
(2019) 25
Figure 16. Landfilling Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors) (2019) 25
Figure 17. Summary of Wasted Food Generation and Management Flows (Food Retail, Food Service, and
Residential Sectors) (2019) 26
iii
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that more food reaches landfills than any other
material in municipal solid waste (MSW) in the United States, making up over 24 percent of MSW sent to
landfills in 2018 (EPA, 2020b). Producing food and managing food waste uses significant resources. Wasted
food contributes to a broad range of environmental impacts, including climate change, air pollutants, water
scarcity, biodiversity loss, and soil and water quality degradation. In addition, communities with
environmental justice concerns, by definition, bear the brunt of the adverse environmental, social, and
economic consequences of waste management. By preventing food loss and waste where possible, and
recycling the remainder, environmental impacts and impacts to underserved communities can be
substantially reduced. To support food waste reduction strategies, identify current practices, and identify
opportunities to prevent and reduce food waste, EPA publishes annual estimates of how much wasted food
is generated and managed in the United States, which are detailed in this report.
Recognizing the importance of tackling food loss and waste, in 2015, EPA and USDA announced the first-ever
national goal to reduce food loss and waste by 50% by the year 2030 (EPA, 2015). The same year, the United
Nations announced the Sustainable Development Goal Target 12.3, which aims to halve per capita global
food waste at the retail and consumer levels and reduce food losses along production and supply chains,
including post-harvest losses by 2030 (UN, 2019).
The United States is not alone in its efforts to reduce wasted food. Roughly 30% of the food produced
worldwide is lost or wasted each year: approximately 14 percent of the world's food, valued at $400 billion,
is lost on an annual basis between harvest and the retail market (FAO, 2019) and an estimated 17% of food
is wasted at the retail and consumer levels (UNEP, 2021). Food loss and waste accounts for about 7% of global
greenhouse gas emissions and nearly 30% of the world's agricultural land is currently occupied to produce
food that is ultimately never consumed (UN, 2022).
In 2017, the EPA set out to revise its food measurement methodology to more fully capture flows of wasted
food (i.e., excess food and food waste)1 throughout the food system, and to provide more granular annual
estimates of generation and management of wasted food to the public and for purposes of tracking progress
against domestic and international goals. EPA developed an enhanced methodology to calculate sector-
specific estimates of wasted food generation, as well as estimates of how much wasted food was sent to
each management pathway. EPA's "Wasted Food Measurement Methodology Scoping Memo" (EPA, 2020a)
describes the enhanced methodology that EPA developed between 2017 and 2019, the studies used, and
how EPA plans to use the enhanced methodology to calculate its annual estimates for the "Advancing
Sustainable Materials Management: Facts and Figures" report (hereafter referred to as the "Facts and Figures
Report").
EPA has collected and reported data on the generation and management of municipal solid waste (MSW),
including wasted food, in the United States for more than 30 years. EPA historically published U.S. estimates
of wasted food generation and management annually in its "Facts and Figures Report." The 2018 "Facts and
1 The term "excess food" refers to food that is donated to feed people, while the term "food waste" refers to food and
inedible parts not ultimately consumed by humans that are discarded or recycled, such as plate waste (i.e., food that
has been served but not eaten), spoiled food, or peels and rinds considered inedible. The term "wasted food" is an
overarching term that can be used to refer to both excess food and food waste. Section 9.1 contains a glossary of
terms used throughout this report.
iv
-------
Figures Report" (EPA, 2020b) was the first such report that used the enhanced methodology to calculate
wasted food estimates.2
The "2019 Wasted Food Report" serves as an update to the "2018 Wasted Food Report" (EPA, 2020c) and
provides detailed estimates, by sector and management pathway, of 2019 wasted food estimates.
EPA included the following generating sectors in the enhanced methodology:
• Food and beverage manufacturing and processing;
• Residential, which is comprised of single and multi-family units;
• Food retail, which includes supermarkets, supercenters, and food wholesalers;
• Food service, which includes several hospitality categories such as restaurants, hotels, and sports
venues as well as other institutions that provide food service including hospitals, nursing homes,
military installations, office buildings, correctional facilities, colleges and universities, and K-12
schools; and
• Food banks.
EPA's enhanced methodology aims to capture the various methods in which wasted food is managed and to
align with the "Food Loss and Waste Accounting and Reporting Standard" (or "FLW Standard"), which is a
global standard that provides requirements and guidance for quantifying and reporting on the weight of food
and/or associated inedible parts removed from the food supply chain (Food Loss and Waste Protocol, 2016).
EPA's enhanced methodology includes the following management pathways for wasted food. All are
consistent with the FLW Standard, with the addition of food donation.
• Animal feed
• Bio-based materials/biochemical processing
• Codigestion/anaerobic digestion (shorthanded to "Anaerobic digestion" in this report)
• Composting/aerobic processes (shorthanded to "Composting" in this report)
• Controlled combustion
• Donation
• Land application
• Landfill
• Sewer/wastewater treatment
EPA estimates that in 2019, 66.2 million tons of wasted food was generated in the food retail, food service,
and residential sectors. Of this, 40% was from households, 40% was from food service providers, and 20%
was from food retail. Most of this waste (59.8%) was landfilled. An additional 40.1 million tons of wasted
food was generated by the food manufacturing and processing sectors. The biggest proportion of this food
manufacturing and processing waste (42.6%) was managed by anaerobic digestion.
2 https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-recvcling/advancing-sustainable-materials-
management
v
-------
EPA's data for the food retail, food
service, and residential sectors is used
to inform progress toward the national
goal to reduce food loss and waste by
50% by 2030 (EPA, 2015). For food
waste, this goal aims to cut in half the
amount of food from the retail, food
service, and residential sectors that has
been removed from the human food
supply chain compared to a 2016
baseline of 328 pounds per person. In
the three years between the baseline
(2016) and the latest national data
(2019), there was a slight increase of 6%
(from 328 pounds to 349 pounds per
person). More information on measurement for the 2030 goal can be found in Section 7.
EPA recognizes that there have been many efforts across the food system to reduce food waste, and by a
variety of stakeholders, since 2019. For example, in 2021, 25 states introduced food waste-related legislation
(Harvard Food Law and Policy Clinic, 2022), such as landfill bans or other mandates focused on reducing food
waste going to landfills. Some of these laws have yet to be fully implemented, and therefore will continue
to result in the reduction of wasted food, which is not taken into account in this report reflecting 2019 data.
Private sector businesses have made strides in setting goals, measuring and reducing food waste, and
communities are increasingly focused on education and awareness efforts aimed at helping their residents
waste less food at home. EPA continues to support public and private sector efforts, facilitate peer learning,
provide data and conduct research to help decision makers, and provide funding to support waste reduction
efforts. Notably, in 2022, EPA established funding opportunities through the Solid Waste Infrastructure for
Recycling Grant Program and Recycling Education and Outreach Grant Program for a total of $350 million
(EPA, 2022).
Finally, there are some data limitations associated with EPA's estimates. EPA relies on existing studies and
data to develop generation factors, and for some sectors, there are few existing studies. In addition, as states
and cities adopt landfill bans and recycling mandates, estimates that rely heavily on studies that pre-date
those laws may result in overestimation of generation, especially as these laws become more common and
continue to be implemented.
On the management pathway side, composting and anaerobic digestion tonnages may be underestimated,
as EPA did not extrapolate to account for states and facilities for which no data was found. Food donation
may be overestimated due to EPA's approach to accounting for food being donated to food banks not in the
Feeding America network. Data for food being sent down the drain to the sewer system is also lacking. Finally,
while the estimates contained in this report reflect 2019 data, which is prior to the start of the COVID-19
pandemic, EPA is evaluating available information regarding the effects of the pandemic on wasted food
generation and management. These findings will be incorporated into future estimates for 2020 and beyond.
More detail on caveats and uncertainties can be found in Section 7.
In 2019, EPA estimates:
• 66.2 million tons of wasted food was generated in the
food retail, food service, and residential sectors.
o Of this, 40% was from households, 40% was from food
service providers, and 20% was from food retailers,
o Most of this waste (59.8%) was landfilled.
o 349 pounds of food waste per person was managed by
anaerobic digestion, composting, controlled
combustion, land application, landfilling, or sewer,
o The United States has a goal to reduce the food waste
being managed by these pathways to 164 pounds per
person by 2030.
• An additional 40.1 million tons of wasted food was
generated by the food manufacturing and processing
sector.
o This biggest proportion of this waste (42.6%) was
managed by anaerobic digestion.
vi
-------
1 BACKGROUND
Wasted food is a growing problem in our society—but also an untapped opportunity. EPA estimates that
more food reaches landfills than any other material in our municipal solid waste (MSW), making up over
24 percent of MSW sent to landfills in 2018 (EPA, 2020b). Wasted food is generated by households, food
service providers, food retailers, and food manufacturers and processors.
When food is wasted, it also wastes the resources - such as the land, water, energy and labor - that go into
growing, storing, processing, distributing, and preparing that food. Each year, food loss and waste from farm
to kitchen embodies an area of agricultural land the size of California and New York combined, enough energy
to power 50 million U.S. homes for a year, and emissions (excluding landfill emissions) equal to the annual
C02 emissions of 42 coal-fired power plants (EPA, 2021). Through its Sustainable Management of Food
efforts, EPA promotes ways to reduce wasted food and thereby limit its negative environmental
consequences. The approach takes a life-cycle perspective, targeting waste generation at all points in the
food supply chain, and promoting greater efficiency and more creative and beneficial management
strategies. The benefits of such an approach are wide-ranging. Environmental benefits include resource
conservation and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Socioeconomic benefits include improved
efficiency in the food supply system, resulting in better distribution to feed people and financial savings. To
support wasted food reduction strategies, identify current practices, and identify opportunities, EPA
publishes annual estimates of how much wasted food is generated and managed nationally.
EPA, with support from Eastern Research Group (ERG) and Industrial Economics, Incorporated (lEc), updated
its wasted food measurement methodology to build on and expand prior efforts. The enhanced methodology
and resulting 2016 estimates are detailed in "Wasted Food Measurement Methodology Scoping Memo"
(EPA, 2020a). The enhanced methodology was developed through a comprehensive assessment of the
literature supporting the measurement of wasted food generation and management, coupled with a sector-
specific data collection and characterization effort. EPA used this enhanced methodology to calculate its
annual published estimates of wasted food generation and management for the first time in "Advancing
Sustainable Materials Management: 2018 Fact Sheet" (EPA, 2020b) ("2018 Facts and Figures Report"). The
"2018 Wasted Food Report" (EPA, 2020c) was developed to accompany the "2018 Facts and Figures Report",
and provides detailed estimates by sector and management pathway, along with other relevant information
about the 2018 wasted food estimates. This report serves as an update to the "2018 Wasted Food Report"
and provides detailed estimates, by sector and management pathway, of 2019 wasted food estimates.
2 SCOPE AND TERMINOLOGY
This report summarizes the 2019 wasted food estimates for the following sectors:
• Food and beverage manufacturing and processing;
• Residential, which is comprised of single and multi-family units;
• Food retail, which includes supermarkets, supercenters, and food wholesalers;
• Food service, which includes several hospitality categories such as restaurants, hotels, and sports
venues as well as other institutions that provide food services including hospitals, nursing homes,
military installations, office buildings, correctional facilities, colleges and universities, and K-12
schools; and
• Food banks.
1
-------
This report also summarizes 2019 wasted food estimates for the following management pathways3:
• Anaerobic digestion
• Animal feed
• Bio-based materials/biochemical processing
• Composting
• Controlled combustion
• Donation
• Land application
• Landfill
• Sewer/wastewater treatment
EPA's scope for wasted food measurement has historically been on the food retail, food service, and
residential sectors. That is also the scope of the food waste portions of the national 2030 Food Loss and
Waste Reduction Goal (EPA, 2015), and Sustainable Development Goal Target 12.3. (United Nations, 2019),
which both aim to reduce food loss and waste by 50% by 2030. However, the food manufacturing and
processing sector is an important part of the U.S. food system, so estimates for that sector are also presented
in this report. EPA's methodology does not include food loss from the agricultural sector, such as unharvested
crops.
EPA's estimates do not distinguish between "food" and "inedible parts".4 EPA's goal is to make the best use
of not only food that was intended for human consumption, but also the associated inedible parts.
Throughout this document, EPA uses the term "food" as a shorthand to refer to both food and inedible parts.
When referring to both "excess food" (food that is donated to feed people) and "food waste" (food that is
intended for human consumption but is ultimately not consumed by humans), EPA uses the overarching term
"wasted food". Food waste can be managed in a variety of ways, including creation of animal feed,
composting, anaerobic digestion, or sending to landfills or combustion facilities. Examples of wasted food
include unsold food from retail stores; plate waste, uneaten prepared food, or kitchen trimmings from
restaurants, cafeterias, and households; or by-products from food and beverage processing facilities. Section
9.1 contains a glossary of terms used throughout this report.
3 GENERATION OF WASTED FOOD
Generation estimates rely on studies conducted by state and municipal governments, industry groups,
universities, and other groups that measure wasted food generated at facilities in various sectors. Estimates
are correlated to facility-specific characteristics (e.g., revenue or the number of employees) to establish
equations expressing generation factors (e.g., 4,080 lbs of wasted food generated/employee/year in
supermarkets). There are multiple studies, and therefore multiple generation factors, available for most
sectors. EPA scaled up these rates by applying national, sector-specific statistics (e.g., U.S. Census-reported
store sales, number of employees in restaurants, number of patients in hospitals, number of inmates in
correctional facilities), which resulted in multiple generation estimates per sector. An average annual
3 These management pathways are consistent with the "FLW Standard" destinations (Food Loss and Waste Protocol,),
with the addition of food donation. For simplicity, the term anerobic digestion is used in this report to cover both
stand alone and co-digestion facilities and the term composting is used in this report to cover composting and other
aerobic processing as composting is the predominant aerobic management pathway for food waste.
4 EPA uses the definition of "food" and "inedible parts" from the FLW Standard (Food Loss and Waste Protocol). Please
see section 9.1 for a glossary of terms.
2
-------
generation estimate was then calculated for each sector, and these values were summed to calculate overall
estimates of excess food and food waste generated nationally.
To calculate national wasted food generation estimates for 2019, EPA started with a literature search update.
The literature search sought to determine whether any new articles or studies had been published since 2017
(the most recent year for which a comprehensive literature search was conducted) that offer updated
generation factors or data on generation for 2019 estimates. EPA's literature search considered a variety of
criteria when evaluating the usefulness and reliability of different information sources. These criteria
included the following:
• the depth and level of detail provided by the data sources;
• the availability/accessibility of the data in terms of implicit and/or explicit acquisition costs;
• the reliability of the data in terms of the quality of the methods applied; and
• the scope of the data (e.g., whether the study considers wasted food generation at hospitals in one
state or hospitals nationwide).
EPA did not find updated literature for 2019 estimates; all sectors retained the same generation factors as
were used to calculate 2018 estimates in EPA's "2018 Wasted Food Report" (EPA, 2020c). Table 1 summarizes
the generation factors applied to each sector.
3
-------
Table 1. Average Wasted Food Generation Factors (2019)
SECTOR
CATEGORY
GENERATION FACTOR
UNITS
Manufacturing/
Processing
N/A
0.095
Lbs/sales $/year
Residential
N/A
337.9
Lbs/household/year
17.0
Percent food waste (of total household
waste)
Food Retail
Supermarkets
2.0
Tons/employee/year
Supercenters
0.38
Tons/employee/year
Supermarkets and
Supercenters1
104.9
Tons/ establishment/year
10.0
Lbs/thousand $ revenue/year
Food Wholesale2
120.7
Tons/facility/year
0.005
Tons/thousand $ revenue/year
Food Service
Hotels
1,137.8
Lbs/employee/year
Restaurants (full
service)
3,050.7
Lbs/employee/year
39.1
Tons/facility/year
33.0
Lbs/thousand $ revenue/year
Restaurants (limited
service)
2,751.3
Lbs/employee/year
40.9
Tons/facility/year
33.0
Lbs/thousand $ revenue/year
Sports Venues
0.31
Lbs/visitor/year
Hospitals
653.1
Lbs/bed/year
0.47
Lbs/meal
Nursing Homes
657.0
Lbs/bed/year
0.55
Lbs/meal
Military Installations
105.3
Lbs/person/year
Office Buildings
169.9
Lbs/employee/year
0.22
Tons/1000 sq ft/year
Correctional Facilities
1.1
Lbs/inmate/day
Colleges and
Universities
0.36
Lbs/student/meal
0.44
Lbs/student/meal
0.01
Tons/student/year
K-12 Schools
26.3
Lbs/student/year
0.43
Lbs/meal
Food Banks
N/A
372.5
Tons/establishment/year
1 The revenue total from supermarkets and supercenters includes in-person shopping from these traditional brick
and mortar establishments as well as revenue from any secondary e-commerce business from these retailers.
2 When a company has a large e-commerce segment, typically with separate warehousing facilities, the Annual Retail
Trade survey considers this a separate industry from the company's brick-and-mortar NAICS classifications, and this
type of e-commerce is included in the wholesale category.
EPA then updated the extrapolation sector-specific statistics to reflect 2019 data.
Table 2 summarizes the 2019 extrapolation basis value for each generation sector and category and the
associated data source.
4
-------
Table 2. Extrapolation Bases for Wasted Food Generation Estimates (2019)
SECTOR/CATEGORY
GENERATION FACTOR
UNITS
EXTRAPOLATION BASIS
VALUE
EXTRAPOLATION
BASIS UNITS
SOURCE
Food Manufacturing
and Processing
Lbs/sales $/year
845,096,721,000
Sales $
(United States Census
Bureau, 2021a)
Residential
Lbs/household/year
128,579,000
Households
(United States Census
Bureau, 2021)
Percent food waste
149.2
Million Tons
MSW
(EPA, 2020b)
Food Retail
Supermarkets and
Supercenters
Tons/employee/year
(supermarkets)
2,942,271
Employees
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022d)
Tons/employee/year
(supercenters)
1,782,231
Employees
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022e)
Tons/establishment/year
123,833
Establishments
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022f)
Lbs/thousand $
revenue/year
716,842,000,000
Revenue 51
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022)
Wholesalers
Tons/facility/year
35,112
Facilities
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022a)
Tons/thousand $
revenue/year
685,095,000,000
Revenue $
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022b)
Tons/thousand $
revenue/year
(E-commerce)
1,368,000,000
E-commerce
Revenue $2
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022c)
Food Service
Hotels
Lbs/employee/year
2,102,377
Employees
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022e)
Restaurants/
(full service)
Lbs/employees/year
5,860,567
Employees
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022f)
Tons/facility/year
272,689
Facilities
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022f)
Lbs/thousand $
revenue/year
300,700,000,000
Revenue $
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022f)
Restaurants/
(limited service)
Lbs/employees/year
5,418,681
Employees
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022g)
Tons/facility/year
330,296
Facilities
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022g)
Lbs/thousand $
revenue/year
290,400,000,000
Revenue $
(United States Census
Bureau, 2022g)
Sports Venues
Lbs/visitor/year
256,187,897
Visitors
(Ballpark Digest,
2019), (Ballparks of
Baseball, 2019),
(ESPN, 2019), (Inside
Hoops, 2019), (NCAA,
2019a), (NCAA,
2019b), (Soccer
Stadium Digest, 2019),
(USCH, 2019)
Hospitals
Lbs/bed/year
919,559
Beds
(American Hospital
Association, 2021)
Lbs/meal
1,260,760,907
Meals
(Statista, 2022)
Nursing Homes
Lbs/bed/year
1,660,400
Beds
(National Center for
Health Statistics (U.S.),
2019)
Lbs/meal
1,280,931,000
Meals
(National Center for
Health Statistics,
2021)
Military Installations
Lbs/person/year
1,189,842
Active-duty
military in U.S.
(Defense Manpower
Data Center, 2019)
5
-------
SECTOR/CATEGORY
GENERATION FACTOR
UNITS
EXTRAPOLATION BASIS
VALUE
EXTRAPOLATION
BASIS UNITS
SOURCE
Office Buildings
Lbs/employee/year
55,511,900
Employees
(U.S. Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 2022)
Tons/1000 sq ft/year
16,682,000
1,000 sq ft
(Energy Information
Administration (EIA),
2019)
Correctional Facilities
Lbs/inmate/day
2,086,600
Inmates
(Minton et al., 2021)
Colleges and
Universities
Lbs/student/meal
3,381,166,269
Meals
(National Center for
Education Statistics,
2019b)
Tons/student/year
20,006,901
Students
(National Center for
Education Statistics,
2019b)
K-12 Schools
Lbs/student/year
56,350,000
Students
(National Center for
Education Statistics,
2019a)
Lbs/meal
9,278,062,379
Meals
(U.S. Department of
Agriculture Food and
Nutrition Service,
2021)
Food Banks
Tons/establishment/year
1,270
Establishments
(Hoovers, 2019)
1 Revenue includes sales from in-person shopping as well as e-commerce from these retailers whose primary business is brick-and-
mortar stores. This revenue excludes alcohol sales.
2 Only the revenue for food and beverage sales from companies whose primary business is e-commerce (NAICS 4541) is used here.
Food and beverage e-commerce sales do not breakout alcohol sales.
To arrive at generation estimates for each generation sector, EPA then multiplied generation factors by the
corresponding updated extrapolation basis value and averaged annual generation for sectors with multiple
generation estimates.
Table 3 summarizes annual wasted food generation estimates for each of the sectors, as well as contextual
information on each sector. First, for each sector, the table identifies, where appropriate, the NAICS codes
used to define the sector. Second, the table lists the number of unique empirical studies on which the
generation estimate is based. Finally, the table provides estimated generation in tons per year, as well as the
percent of all generation that the sector represents.
EPA estimates that in 2019, 66.2 million tons of wasted food was generated in the food retail, food service,
and residential sectors. An additional 40.1 million tons of wasted food was generated in the food
manufacturing and processing sector.
As shown in Table 3 and Figure 1, households account for about 40% of total generation. Restaurants and
supermarkets and supercenters are also major generators, followed by office buildings, food wholesalers, K-
12 schools, and hotels. Most of the remaining categories have annual generation below one million tons.
Table 4 quantifies the wasted food generated by food manufacturers and processors.
6
-------
Table 3. Estimated Annual Wasted Food Generation for the Food Retail, Food Service and Residential
Sectors (2019)
SECTOR
CATEGORY
NAICS CODES
NUMBER OF
STUDIES
INFORMING
GENERATION
RATE
ESTIMATED
ANNUAL
GENERATION
(TONS PER
YEAR)
(CATEGORY)
PERCENT OF
TOTAL
(CATEGORY)
ESTIMATED
ANNUAL
GENERATION
(TONS PER
YEAR)
(SECTOR)
PERCENT
OF TOTAL
(SECTOR)
Residential
N/A
N/A
12
26,502,346
40.0%
26,502,346
40.0%
Food Retail
Supermarkets
and
Supercenters
445110, 445120,
445210, 445220,
445230, 445291,
445292, 445299,
452311
9
8,998,443
13.6%
12,971,959
19.6%
Food
Wholesale
424410, 424420,
424430, 424440,
424450, 424460,
424470, 424480,
424490, 45413
3
3,973,516
6.0%
Food
Service
Hotels
7211
4
1,196,076
1.8%
26,741,937
40.4%
Restaurants
(full and
limited
service)
722511, 722320,
722514, 722513,
722330, 722515
8
18,337,784
27.7%
Sports
Venues
N/A
3
39,702
0.06%
Hospitals
6221
6
298,576
0.45%
Nursing
Homes
6239, 6233,
6232, 62311
3
415,591
0.63%
Military
Installations
N/A
2
62,627
0.09%
Office
Buildings
N/A
3
4,093,447
6.2%
Correctional
Facilities
922140, 5612101
6
425,232
0.64%
Colleges and
Universities
N/A
10
624,371
0.94%
K-12 Schools
N/A
6
1,248,532
1.9%
N/A
Food Banks2
624210
1
473,027
N/A
473,027
N/A
Total Generation
66,216,242
100%
66,216,242
100%
1 In several instances (e.g., hospitals, nursing homes, correctional facilities), the sector has a NAICS code, but the extrapolation data
are not strictly delineated by NAICS code as with Census data. For instance, nursing homes are aligned with several NAICS codes, but
data on nursing home populations are compiled by CDC, not by the Census Bureau.
2 Food waste from food banks is not added to total generation because it would represent "double counting," i.e., it is already
accounted for in Total Generation, because total generation includes excess food that was donated to food banks (and some food
donated to food banks inevitably is wasted).
3 Note that in 2019, EPA added wasted food estimates from e-commerce sales (NAICS code 4541). When a company has a large e-
commerce segment, typically with separate warehousing facilities, the Annual Retail Trade survey considers this a separate industry
from the company's brick-and-mortar NAICS classifications. E-commerce sales that occur at brick-and-mortar locations are included
in the overall revenue for the supermarkets and supercenters.
7
-------
Figure 1. Percentage Distribution of Wasted Food Generation from the Food Retail, Food Service and
Residential Sectors (2019)
Office Buildings
40%
Food Retail:
Supermarkets/
Supercenters
13%
Table 4. Estimated Annual Wasted Food Generation for the Food Manufacturing and Processing Sector
(2019)
SECTOR
NAICS CODES
NUMBER OF STUDIES
INFORMING GENERATION RATE
ESTIMATED ANNUAL GENERATION
(TONS PER YEAR)
Food Manufacturing/
Processing
311 and 3121 (excluding 311111,
311119, 312112, and 312113)
3
40,050,707
4 MANAGEMENT OF WASTED FOOD
The characterization of management pathways for wasted food involves two phases: (1) an initial
characterization based on percentage distributions reported in the literature; and (2) a revised
characterization based on actual tonnages for several key pathways.
EPA developed the initial management characterization for each sector as part of the generation analysis.
The management pathways align with the "FLW Standard" destinations (Food Loss and Waste Protocol,
2016), with the addition of donation of excess food to food banks. EPA includes the following management
pathways (please see Section 9.1 for a glossary):
• Anaerobic digestion,
• Animal feed,
• Bio-based materials/biochemical processing,
• Composting,
• Controlled combustion,
• Donation,
8
-------
• Land application,
• Landfill, and
• Sewer/wastewater treatment.
The initial analysis drew on sector-specific literature that provided a percentage distribution across the
management pathways (i.e., an estimate of the percent of wasted food destined for each major management
pathway by generating sector).5 These same studies were used for the 2019 update with the exception of
the anaerobic digestion pathway, which was based on reported tonnages by sector to EPA's 2019 anaerobic
digestion survey (EPA, 2023). The survey did not have breakdowns for food waste going to AD from nursing
homes but did have reported tonnages for other sector categories included in this report (although reported
tonnage for some were zero).
• Food manufacturers, food retail, and restaurants: Annual surveys performed by Business for Social
Responsibility (BSR) in 2013 and 2014 (Business for Social Responsibility, 2013, 2014) and the Food
Waste Reduction Alliance (FWRA) in 2016 (Food Waste Reduction Alliance, 2016) provided the
management distribution. These three studies surveyed manufacturers, food retailers, and
restaurants and provided detail on how those sectors manage their wasted food.6 After subtracting
out the amount reported to be sent to anaerobic digesters based on the EPA's 2019 anaerobic
digestion survey (EPA, 2023), the remaining waste management pathways were distributed among
the remaining percentage of waste generated from each sector category. EPA used the food
manufacturing data for the manufacturing and processing sector, the food retail data for the food
retail/wholesale sector, and the restaurant data for both full service and limited-service restaurants.
• Residential: EPA developed a distribution based on a variety of studies examining composting rates
in different geographic locations, as well as studies on the use of household food waste disposers
(e.g., in-sink disposals). EPA then assumed that the remaining food waste that was not sent to
composting, sewer, or anaerobic digestion is either landfilled or combusted, with the proportion
based on various literature sources.
• Remaining sectors (food services sectors other than restaurants as well as food banks): The initial
management characterization for 20167 and 2018 estimates relied on the general wasted food
management distribution estimated in "Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2017 Fact
Sheet" (EPA, 2019). For the 2019 estimates, EPA made a change to the management characterization
for food services sectors other than restaurants, as well as food banks. Based on similarities in
operations, EPA applied the management distribution for restaurants, as derived from the BSR and
FWRA surveys, to the remaining food services sectors for all management pathways except for
anaerobic digestion. In addition, EPA applied the management distribution for retail, as derived from
5 For more detailed explanation on the initial management percentage methodology and distributions, please refer to
"Food Waste Measurement Methodology Scoping Memo" (EPA, 2020a).
6 The annual surveys performed by FWRA reports a minimal amount of food waste managed by an "other" category,
however, the surveys do not define "other". As a result, EPA zeroed out the "other" category and redistributed the
management percentage to the other management pathways. In addition, the annual surveys report the amount of
food waste managed by a combination of landfilling and controlled combustion (categorized as "disposed of). The
amount combusted on site was specified but the specific breakdown of total (on and off site) combustion and
landfilling are not provided so EPA assumed a breakout of 80.4% to landfill and 19.6% to controlled combustion. This
estimated breakout was derived from the Energy Recovery Council's (ERC) Directory of Waste-to-Energy facilities
(Energy Recovery Council (ERC), 2018).
7 The initial 2016 management characterization estimates are from the "Food Waste Measurement Methodology
Scoping Memo" (EPA, 2020a).
9
-------
the BSR and FWRA surveys, to food banks but modified the management distribution by zeroing out
the "food donation" and "anaerobic digestion" category and redistributing these management
percentages to the other management pathways. This change in management distribution sources
was implemented so that management distributions for 2019 would be based on more sector specific
information.
To develop a revised management profile, subsequent analyses incorporated more detailed data on three
management pathways, leading to revised estimates of the landfill and controlled combustion pathways:
• Composting: EPA developed estimates of food waste composted by summarizing state-specific data
available from state environmental agency websites and published reports and comparing reported
values with EPA's State Data Measurement Sharing Program (SMP) (Re-TRAC, 2019)-these 2019
composting estimates are provided in Table 12. EPA did not extrapolate these data to account for
activity in the remaining states, tribes, and territories for which data were not available. MSW
compost, which is compost of the organic fraction of MSW, was also included in the total compost
estimate and reflected production from all known sources based on published literature. Data
compiled suggest that about 3.3 million tons of food waste were managed through composting in
2019. Note that these estimates do not include food waste composted from food manufacturers and
processors. To estimate food waste composted by manufacturers and processors, EPA used the
results of surveys conducted by BSR and the FWRA of food manufacturers around the nation as noted
above.
• Anaerobic digestion: EPA arrived at estimates for food waste anaerobically digested using EPA's
2019 nationwide survey of anaerobic digestion facilities (EPA, 2023). In its latest "Anaerobic
Digestion Facilities Processing Food Waste in the United States" report, EPA conducted a nationwide
survey of anaerobic digestion facilities in the U.S. in 2021, the results of which reflect 2019 data. Of
the 275 surveys distributed to anaerobic digestion facilities, 99 were returned by operational
facilities, resulting in a survey response rate of 36 percent, which a significantly lower participation
rate than the survey including 2018 data of 67 percent. Of the 99 facilities who responded to the
survey, 89 facilities provided information about the amount of food waste they processed. The 2023
report (containing 2019 data) separates out food waste processed by anaerobic digesters by
category. These category specific values are integrated into the 2019 wasted food estimates to
provide more detail to category management profiles. Nursing homes were not included in the 2023
anaerobic digestion report (containing 2019 data), and two categories had no reported tonnages
(military installations and correctional facilities); as a result, no food waste is allocated to anaerobic
digestion in these categories. The food manufacturing and processing sector included in this report
comprises the "Industrial (other)", "Manufacturing/Processing", and "Other" categories detailed in
the 2023 anaerobic digestion report (containing 2019 data). The anaerobic digestion amount for
"Retail/wholesale" category included in the 2023 anaerobic digestion report (containing 2019 data)
was equally divided between the food retail and food wholesale categories included in the 2019
wasted food estimates. Livestock farms and food bank anaerobic digestion data are not included in
the 2019 wasted food estimates as livestock farms are out of scope of this report and reported
anaerobic digestion food waste from food banks was very small. Anaerobic digestion facilities
reported a total of 17.60 million tons of food waste managed by anaerobic digestion annually in
2019, 17.59 million tons of which is included in the 2019 wasted food estimates.
• Donation: EPA's estimation method is primarily based on a 2019 annual report from Feeding America
(Feeding America, 2019), the largest domestic hunger relief organization with a nationwide network
10
-------
of more than 200 food banks. Feeding America secures food from corporate manufacturers, retailers,
and produce suppliers nationwide; stores excess food temporarily in warehouses; and then
distributes the excess food to families and individuals through food assistance agencies such as youth
or senior centers, shelters, and food pantries. EPA calculated the total quantity of excess food
received by Feeding America food banks (i.e., food that would have otherwise been thrown away by
the establishments donating the food, but which was instead donated to Feeding America food
banks), and then developed an estimate of excess food managed per Feeding America food bank.
While Feeding America is the largest national network of food banks, there are hundreds more food
bank establishments in the United States, so EPA multiplied excess food received per Feeding
America food bank by the total number of food bank establishments nationwide to estimate total
excess food managed through donation. The number of food banks in the United States is based on
data available from Hoovers, a research company that provides information on companies and
industries. Based on analysis and extrapolation of data from Feeding America, the food retail and
food service sectors donated approximately 5.1 million tons of excess food in 2019. The food
manufacturing and processing sector donated an additional estimated 2.2 million tons of excess food
in 2019.
In order to integrate the composting and donation estimates into the overall analysis of management
pathways and arrive at landfilling and controlled combustion figures, EPA associated the aggregate figures
with specific generator categories (i.e., determined where the food waste and excess food originated). The
analysis incorporated the following assumptions:
• Composting: The quantity of food waste allocated to composting is reduced when using the
aggregate based on state data (3.9 million tons) in place of the initial estimate (5.1 million tons). The
analysis retains the relative proportion of the generation sectors contributing to composting but
transfers the net quantity (5.1 - 3.9= 1.2 million tons) to landfilling and controlled combustion.
• Donation: Relative to the initial characterization, the revised characterization points to a larger
quantity of excess food being recovered for donation. The newly estimated 7.8 million tons is
assumed to originate from sectors identified in the Feeding America donation profile. These 7.8
million tons reflects the total amount of food donations but some of these donations cannot be used
by the food banks and are re-routed to other management pathways. EPA assumes that 3.5% of
donated excess food is from food service, 28.2% from food manufacturers and processors, and 68.3%
from food retail.8 The 68.3% associated with food retail is split between supermarkets/supercenters
and wholesale in proportion to their generation. The 3.5% in food service is split between each of
the food service categories. In the food retail and food service sectors, the increase in excess food
donation amounts is netted out of landfilling and controlled combustion because these are the two
management pathways receiving the largest tonnages of food waste from those sectors. In the food
manufacturing and processing sector, the increase is netted out of landfilling, controlled combustion,
land application and animal feed because these all receive large amounts of wasted food from this
sector.
For the food retail, food service and residential sectors together, EPA estimates that 59.8% of wasted food is
sent to landfill, 14.6% is managed by sewer/wastewater treatment, 7.8% is managed by donation, 6.0% is
managed by controlled combustion, and smaller amounts are managed by other management pathways. For
food the food manufacturing and processing sector, EPA estimates that 42.3% of wasted food is managed by
8 These percentages are based on a 2019 annual report from Feeding America (Feeding America, 2019).
11
-------
anaerobic digestion, 34.2% is used to create animal feed, 12.9% goes to land application, and 5.5% is
managed by food donation. Table 5 and Table 6 present the revised profile of wasted food management, and
Figure 2 and Figure 3 depict the percentage distribution to each management pathway. It is important to
note that the estimates for donation in Table 5 exclude the small share of excess food that is donated but
which food banks cannot distribute (i.e., 473,027 tons) and therefore becomes food waste that is routed to
other management pathways. This tonnage is included in the other management pathways where that food
waste is sent.
Table 5. Quantity of Wasted Food Managed by the Food Retail, Food Service, and Residential Sectors Based
on Revised Management Profile (2019)
MANAGEMENT
PATHWAY
QUANTITY MANAGED
(TONS)
PERCENTAGE
MANAGED
Donation1
5,135,293
7.76%
Animal Feed
1,516,771
2.29%
Bio-based
Materials/Biochemical
Processing
2,335,988
3.53%
Anaerobic digestion
538,539
0.81%
Composting
3,304,764
4.99%
Land Application
141,371
0.21%
Controlled Combustion
9,646,263
14.57%
Landfill
39,621,902
59.84%
Sewer/Wastewater
Treatment
3,975,352
6.00%
TOTAL
66,216,242
100.00%
1 This estimate excludes the small share of excess food (473,027 tons) that
food banks cannot distribute and is therefore food waste that is routed to
other management pathways.
12
-------
Table 6. Quantity of Wasted Food Managed by the Manufacturing and Processing Sector Based on
Revised Management Profile (2019)
MANAGEMENT
PATHWAY
QUANTITY MANAGED
(TONS)
PERCENTAGE
MANAGED
Donation1
2,205,990
5.51%
Animal Feed
13,709,339
34.23%
Bio-based
Materials/Biochemical
Processing
64,737
0.16%
Anaerobic digestion
17,055,531
42,58%
Composting
583,305
1.46%
Land Application
5,183,851
12,94%
Controlled Combustion
330,326
0.82%
Landfill
917,630
2.29%
Sewer/Wastewater
Treatment
0
0.00%
TOTAL
40,050,707
100.00%
1 These figures exclude the small share of excess food (473,027 tons) that food
banks cannot distribute and is therefore food waste that is routed to other
management pathways.
Figure 2. Percentage Distribution of Wasted Food Managed by the Food Retail, Food Service, and Residential
Sectors (2019)
Landfill
(60%)
Controlled
(15%)
Composting
(5%)
Bio-based
Materials/Biochemical
Food Donation
Animal Feed
Anaerobic Digestion
Processing
(3%)
_ Land application
(0,2%)
13
-------
Figure 3. Percentage Distribution of Wasted Food Managed by the Manufacturing and Processing Sector
(2019)
Composting
Food Donation
(6%)
Animal Feed
(34%)
4.1 SECTOR-BY-SECTOR SUMMARY
4.1.1 Food Manufacturing and Processing Sector
Food and beverage manufacturers and processors generated an estimated 40.1 million tons of wasted food
in 2019. The majority (42.6%) of this sector's wasted food was managed by anaerobic digestion, 34.2% animal
feed, 12.9% by land application, with smaller proportions managed by other methods. Food and beverage
manufacturing/processing industries are unique from the other sectors EPA analyzed in the methods they
use to manage their wasted food (i.e., a much higher percentage going to anaerobic digestion, animal feed
and land application, and a lower percentage going to landfill, than the food retail, food service, and
residential sectors). Figure 4 depicts the proportion of the food and beverage manufacturing and processing
sector's wasted food managed by each pathway.
14
-------
Figure 4. Food Manufacturing and Processing Sector Wasted Food Management Profile (2019)
Food Donation
Animal Feed
Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing
Anaerobic Digestion
Composti ng
Land application
Controlled combustion
Landfill
Sewer/Wastewater Treatment
2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0
MillionTons
4.1.2 Food Retail Sector
The food retail sector includes supermarkets, supercenters, and food wholesalers.9 The food retail sector
was estimated to generate 13.0 million tons of wasted food (9.0 million tons from supermarkets and
supercenters, and 4.0 million tons from food wholesale). About 41.1% of the food retail sector's wasted food
was donated, 20.9% was landfilled, 14.6% was sent to composting, 11.1% was sent to animal feed, 6.8% was
combusted, and smaller proportions were managed by other methods. Figure 5 depicts the proportion of the
food retail sector's wasted food managed by each pathway.
9 Food wholesale includes food waste resulting from e-commerce under NAICS code 4541. Online grocery shopping
done through brick-and-mortar supermarkets or supercenters are included in the revenue from those stores under
food retail.
15
-------
Figure 5. Food Retail Sector Wasted Food Management Profile (2019)
Food Donation
Animal Feed
Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing
Anaerobic Digestion
Composting
Land application |
Controlled combustion
Landfill
Sewer/Wastewater T reatment
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0
Million Tons
5.0
6.0
4.1.3 Food Service Sector
The food service sector includes hospitality categories (restaurants, hotels, and sports venues) and various
types of institutions serving food (hospitals, nursing homes, military institutions, office buildings, correctional
facilities, colleges and universities, and K-12 schools). The food service sector was estimated to generate 26.7
million tons of wasted food, with the majority (over 73%) coming from the hospitality categories. Almost
three quarters (72%) of the wasted food generated from the food service sector was landfilled, 17% was
managed by controlled combustion, and 8% was composted, with smaller proportions managed by other
methods. Figure 6 depicts the proportion of the food service sector's wasted food managed by each pathway.
Figure 6. Food Service Sector Wasted Food Management Profile (2019)
Food Donation
Animal Feed
Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing
Anaerobic Digestion
Composting
Land application
Controlled combustion
Landfill
Se we r/Wa st ewaterTreatment
5 10 15 20
Million Tons
16
-------
4.1.4 Residential Sector
The residential sector, which includes single family and multi-family dwellings, was estimated to generate
26.5 million tons of wasted food. The majority (66.2%) of residential wasted food was landfilled; 15.1% was
combusted, and 15.0% was sent to sewer/wastewater treatment. Only 3.7% was composted. Figure 7 depicts
the proportion of residential wasted food managed by each pathway.
Figure 7. Residential Sector Wasted Food Management Profile (2019)
Food Donation
Animal Feed
Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing
Anaerobic Digestion
Composting
Land application
Controlled combustion
Landfill
Sewe r/Wastewater T reatment
Million Tons
4.1.5 Food Banks
Food banks are also a minor generator of food waste, because they receive a small amount (6.1%) of excess
food that is unfit for distribution due to damage, spoiling, and other reasons. Food banks were estimated to
generate 473,027 tons of food waste. Note that this tonnage is already accounted for in the estimates of
wasted food generated in the food manufacturing and processing, food retail, food service, and residential
sectors, because establishments in those sectors donate excess food to the food banks (i.e., 473,027 tons of
the excess food that is donated from these sectors to food banks cannot be distributed and ends up becoming
food waste). Approximately 42.4% of the food waste generated in food banks was landfilled, 17.1% was
composted, 16.3% was combusted, 14.4% was managed by animal feed, and smaller proportions were
managed by other methods. Figure 8 depicts the proportion of food banks' food waste managed by each
pathway.
¦; n
in rt
inn
17
-------
Figure 8. Food Bank Food Waste Management Profile (2019)
Food Donation
Animal
Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing
Anaerobic Digestion
Composting
Land application
Controlled combustion
Sewe r/Wastewater T reatment
50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0
Thousand Tons
4.2 PATHWAY-BY-PATHWAY SUMMARY
4.2.1 Food Donation
In 2019, 7.8%, or 5.1 million tons, of wasted food from food retail, food service, and residential sectors was
managed by food donation. This percentage reflects the net amount donated after subtracting out the
wasted food (473,027) that could not be used by food banks. Most of this excess food was donated by the
supermarket and supercenter retailers and wholesalers. EPA does not have data on food managed by
donation from the residential sector.
Figure 9 depicts the proportion of food donated by each of the categories in the food retail, food service, and
residential sectors for which EPA had data. In addition, in 2019, 2.2 million tons of wasted food from the food
manufacturing and processing sector was managed by food donation.
18
-------
Figure 9. Food Donation Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, and Residential Sectors) (2019)
Foodservice:
Restaurants
4.2.2 Animal Feed
In 2019, 2.3%, or 1.5 million tons, of wasted food from the food retail, food service, residential, and food
bank sectors was managed by animal feed. Most of this wasted food managed by animal feed was generated
by the supermarket and supercenter retailers and wholesalers. EPA does not have data on food sent to
animal feed by the residential sector.
Figure 10 depicts the proportion of food sent to animal feed by each of the categories in the food retail, food
service, residential, and food bank sectors for which EPA had data. In addition, 13.7 million tons of wasted
food generated from the food manufacturing and processing sector was managed by animal feed.
19
-------
Figure 10. Animal Feed Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors) (2019)
Food Service
0.5%
1
(4.5%)
Food Banks
_ Food Retail:
Wholesale
(29.1%)
Food Retail:
Supermarkets/
Supercenters
(65.9%)
4.2.3 Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing
In 2019, approximately 3.5%, or 2.3 million tons, of wasted food from the food retail, food service, residential,
and food bank sectors was managed by bio-based materials/biochemical processing (i.e., converting material
into industrial products). Most of this wasted food managed by bio-based materials/biochemical processing
was from restaurants, other food service providers and supermarket and supercenter retailers. EPA does not
have data on food managed by bio-based materials/biochemical processing by the residential sector.
Figure 11 depicts the proportion of food managed by bio-based materials/biochemical processing from each
of the categories in the food retail, food service, residential, and food bank sectors for which EPA had data.
In addition, approximately 64,737 tons of wasted food generated from the food manufacturing and
processing sector was managed by bio-based materials/biochemical processing.
20
-------
Figure 11. Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and
Food Bank Sectors) (2019)
Food Service:
Other
27.3%
FoodService:
Restaurants
(59.6%)
^Food Banks
/ (1-1%)
_ Food Retail:
Wholesale
(3.7%)
Food Retail:
Supermarkets/
Supercenters
(8.3%)
4.2.4 Anaerobic Digestion
In 2019, less than 1.0%, or approximately 538,539 tons, of wasted food from the food retail, food service,
residential, and food bank sectors was managed by anaerobic digestion. Most of this wasted food managed
by anaerobic digestion was from supermarket and supercenter retailers, restaurants, and wholesalers. The
amount of food waste managed by anaerobic digestion by food banks was very small and has been excluded.
Figure 12 depicts the proportion of food managed by anaerobic digestion from each of the categories in the
food retail, food service, residential and food bank sectors for which EPA had data. In addition, approximately
17.1 million tons of wasted food generated from the food manufacturing and processing sector was managed
by anaerobic digestion.
21
-------
Figure 12. Anaerobic Digestion Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors)
(2019)
Food Service:
Other
13
Households
(1.2%)
Foodservice:
Restaurants
(29.2%)
Food Retail:
Wholesale
(17.2%)
V
Food Retail:
Supermarkets/
Supercenters
(39.0%)
4.2.5 Composting
In 2019, 5%, or 3.3 million tons, of wasted food from the food retail, food service, residential, and food bank
sectors was composted. Most of this wasted food managed by composting was from supermarket and
supercenter retailers, households, and wholesalers.
Figure 13 depicts the proportion of food managed by composting from each of the categories in the food
retail, food service, residential, and food bank sectors. In addition, approximately 583,305 tons of wasted
food generated from the food manufacturing and processing sector was managed by composting.
22
-------
Figure 13. Composting Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors) (2019)
Food Service:
Restaurants
Food Re1
Supermar
Supercen
(39.9%
Food Service:
Other
3.3%
Food Banks
(2.4%)
_ Households
(29.6%)
Wholesale
(17.6%)
4.2.6 Land Application
In 2019, 0.21%, or 141,371 tons, of wasted food from the food retail, food service, residential, and food bank
sectors was managed by land application. All wasted food managed by land application was from
supermarket and supercenter retailers, wholesalers, and food banks. EPA does not have data on food
managed by land application by the food service or residential sectors.
Figure 14 depicts the proportion of food managed by land application from each of the categories in the food
retail, food service, residential, and food bank sectors for which EPA had data. In addition, approximately 5.2
million tons of wasted food generated from the food manufacturing and processing sector was managed by
land application.
23
-------
Figure 14. Land Application Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors) (2019)
4.2.7 Controlled Combustion
In 2019, 14.6%, or 9.6 million tons, of wasted food from the food retail, food service, residential, and food
bank sectors was managed by controlled combustion. Most of this wasted food managed by controlled
combustion was from households, restaurants, and other food service providers.
Figure 15 depicts the proportion of food managed by controlled combustion from each of the categories in
the food retail, food service, residential, and food bank sectors. In addition, approximately 330,326 tons of
wasted food generated from the food manufacturing and processing sectors was managed by controlled
combustion.
24
-------
Figure 15. Controlled Combustion Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors)
(2019)
Food Service:
N—Households
(41.6%)
4.2.8 Landfill
In 2019, 59.8%, or 39.6 million tons, of wasted food from the food retail, food service, residential, and food
bank sectors was managed by landfilling. Most of this wasted food managed by landfilling was from
households, restaurants, and other food service providers.
Figure 16 depicts the proportion of food managed by landfilling from each of the categories in the food retail,
food service, residential, and food bank sectors, in addition, approximately 917,630 tons of wasted food
generated from the food manufacturing and processing sector was managed by landfilling.
Figure 16. Landfilling Sources (Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors) (2019)
Food Service:
(2.1%) (44.2%)
25
-------
4.2.9 Sewer/Wastewater ireatment
In 2019, 14.6%, or 4.0 million tons, of wasted food from the food retail, food service, residential, and food
bank sectors was managed by sewer/wastewater treatment. All this wasted food managed by
sewer/wastewater treatment was from households. EPA does not have data on wasted food managed by
sewer/wastewater treatment by any other sectors, including food retail, food service, food bank, and food
manufacturing and processing.
4.3 OVERALL SUMMARY OF GENERATION AND MANAGEMENT OF WASTED FOOD
The generation and management characterizations can be combined in an overall diagram of the food
system. The Sankey diagram in Figure 17 show the origination and ultimate destination of wasted food,
depicting larger flows with broader connective arrows.
Figure 17. Summary of Wasted Food Generation and Management Flows (Food Retail, Food Service, and
Residential Sectors) (2019)
I Food Banks
Food Retail
Animal Feed C3
Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing
Anaerobic Digestion —
Composting []
1 and Annliratinn
Controlled Combustion
0
I
Food Service
1 anrifill
Households
_a ! iu 11ii
Sewer/Wastewa ter Treatment
:
26
-------
5 PROGRESS TOWARD THE U.S. 2030 FOOD LOSS AND WASTE REDUCTION GOAL
In 2015, EPA and USDA announced the first-ever national goal to reduce food loss and waste by 50% by the
year 2030. While the goal aims to reduce food loss, neither EPA nor USDA have baseline data for food loss,
which includes food that goes uneaten in the agricultural sector, such as unharvested crops. The goal also
aims to reduce food waste by 50% from the food retail, food service, and residential sectors. In 2021, EPA
updated the baseline and goal for the food waste part of the national goal to align with the food waste scope
for Sustainable Development Goal Target 12.3 (United Nations, 2019), which aims to cut in half the amount
of food from the food retail, food service, and residential sectors that has been removed from the human
food supply chain (i.e., food waste that is being sent to: anaerobic digestion; composting; land application;
controlled combustion; landfill; sewer/wastewater; and litter, discards and refuse). Note that EPA does not
have data on how much food waste is going to litter, discards and refuse. Using this updated interpretation,
the baseline for the national goal for food waste is 328 pounds per person, because in 2016, 328 pounds of
food waste per person was sent to anaerobic digestion, composting, land application, controlled combustion,
landfill, and sewer/wastewater from the food retail, food service, and residential sectors. The 2030 goal aims
to reduce this food waste by 50 percent to 164 pounds per person. In 2018, 335 lbs/person was sent to those
six management pathways, and in 2019, 349 lbs/person was sent to those six pathways. In the three years
between the baseline year (2016) and the latest estimates (2019), there was a 6% increase in per capita food
leaving the human food supply chain from the food retail, food service, and residential sectors (i.e., food waste
going to those six management pathways). The U.S. has a long way to go to meet this goal.
Table 7. Progress Toward the 2030 Goal Compared to 2016 Baseline
2016
2018
2019
Total Generation (tons)
62,231,998
63,132,123
66,216,242
Total Food Waste to Food Management
Pathways of Interest1 (tons)
52,946,283
54,688,348
57,228,191
Per Capita Food Waste to Food Management
Pathways of Interest12 (lbs/capita)
328
335
349
% Change since 2016 baseline per capita food
waste managed in pathways of interest
n/a
2%
6%
1Management Pathways of Interest include landfill, controlled combustion, sewer/wastewater treatment, anaerobic
digestion, composting, and land application from the food retail, food service, and residential sectors.
2Cutting the 2016 baseline of 328 lbs/person by 50% would be 164 lbs/person. (EPA, 2015)
6 COMPARISON WITH 2018 METHODOLOGY AND ESTIMATES
There were several methodological changes between the 2018 and 2019 analyses that impacted the
estimates.
For wasted food generation estimates in 2019, EPA included estimates from e-commerce sales classified
under NAICS 4541 which represent establishments whose primary business segment is e-commerce. Since
these companies are typically fulfilling orders with separate warehousing facilities this waste food generation
was included with the wholesale category. Previously, only estimates of e-commerce sales from traditional
27
-------
brick-and-mortar retail establishments were included as part of the retail sector's total revenue. EPA also
included Target and Walmart supercenters to more fully capture wasted food generated in food retail.
For wasted food management estimates in 2019, EPA changed the management pathway characterization for
several sectors. EPA applied the management distribution for restaurants, as derived from the BSR and FWRA
surveys, to all other food services sectors for all management distributions except for anaerobic digestion.
This was done because the latest anaerobic digester survey provided a breakdown for each sector sending
wasted food to digesters (EPA, 2023) that was used as the basis for each sector-specific management estimate.
This survey did not include nursing homes; zero tonnage was reported from military installations and
correctional facilities; and only a very small tonnage was reported from food banks (less than 10 tons), so no
anaerobic digestion management was assumed for these sectors. In addition, EPA applied the management
distribution for retail/wholesale, as derived from the BSR and FWRA surveys, to food banks but modified the
management distribution by zeroing out the "food donation" and "anaerobic digestion" categories and
redistributing the management percentage to the other management pathways.
For food donation, EPA changed the assumption of which sectors donated food to redistribute the estimated
food donations based on the Feeding America extrapolations. In 2018, the donations were assumed to equal
one-third of distributions from food manufacturing and processing, food retail, and food service. In 2019, EPA
used the distribution of donated meals reported to Feeding America to assign the food donation tonnages to
these three sectors. This resulted in 28.2% coming from food manufacturing and processing, 68.3% coming
from food retail, and 3.5% coming from food service, where Feeding America's "emerging retail" category was
used as a proxy for the food service category as it included restaurants and hotels as well convenience stores
(Feeding America, 2019). In addition, in 2019 food donations from the food service sector were assumed to
come from various categories of the food service sector, proportional to each category's generation, while in
2018 the food donations from the food service sector were limited to the restaurant category of the food
service sector.
EPA compared the 2019 excess food and food waste generation estimates with those of 2018. As shown in
Table 8, total generation increased slightly (4.9%) between 2018 and 2019; restaurants, households, sports
venues, and supermarkets and supercenters experienced the greatest increases in generation.10
Supermarkets and supercenters likely experienced an increase in generation due to methodological reasons
- between 2018 and 2019 EPA added food waste generated from large supercenters, such as Target and
Walmart, as noted above. Food wholesale generation also experienced a slight increase as a result of adding
e-commerce food waste generation into this sector.
EPA also compared the 2019 management pathway estimates with those of 2018. As shown in Table 9, the
quantity of food waste managed from the food retail, food service, residential, and food bank sectors through
landfill and controlled combustion was 15% higher in 2019 than 2018. Per-capita landfill and controlled
combustion quantity was 14.5% higher in 2019 than in 2018, likely driven by the decrease in wasted food
managed through the anaerobic digestion, land application, and animal feed pathways. However, these
differences do not likely reflect actual changes in how these sectors managed their food waste between 2018
and 2019; rather, they are a result of methodological changes related to the 2019 anaerobic digestion survey.
As shown in Table 10, the quantity of wasted food managed by anaerobic digestion increased by 68% for the
10 Note that food banks experienced a 11% increase in food waste generated but were not included in the analysis as
food waste from food banks is not added to total generation because it would represent "double counting," i.e., it is
already accounted for in Total Generation.
28
-------
food manufacturing and processing sector and decreased by 89.8% for the food retail, food service, and
residential sectors. This change is the result of the 2019 anaerobic digestion survey including data about which
sector categories the food waste was coming from, which previous surveys did not do. In the 2019 survey, the
vast majority of food waste going to anaerobic digestion is reported to be from food manufacturers and
processors, but in 2018, EPA did not have that breakdown, and had to make assumptions regarding how much
food waste each sector category was sending to anaerobic digestors that allocated more food waste going to
anaerobic digestion from sectors other than manufacturing and processing.
Finally, EPA changed the terminology for the sector categories between the 2018 and 2019 reports. In the
"2018 Wasted Food Report" (EPA, 2020c), the sector categories were industrial, commercial, institutional and
residential. In this report, we elected to use terminology that is more commonly used and understood among
stakeholders, so the sector categories are now: manufacturing/processing, food retail, food service, and
residential. These are defined in more detail in Sections 2 and 3.
29
-------
Table 8. Comparison of 2018 and 2019 Wasted Food Generation Estimates
SECTOR
2018
2019
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
IN ESTIMATED ANNUAL
GENERATION
BETWEEN 2018 AND
2019
ESTIMATED ANNUAL
GENERATION
(TONS PER YEAR)
PERCENT OF TOTAL
ESTIMATED ANNUAL
GENERATION
(TONS PER YEAR)
PERCENT OF TOTAL
Residential
24,954,863
39.53%
26,502,346
40.00%
6.20%
Supermarkets and
Supercenters
8,683,093
13.75%
8,998,443
13.60%
3.63%
Food Wholesale
3,968,229
6.29%
3,973,516
6.00%
0.13%
Hotels
1,219,595
1.93%
1,196,076
1.80%
-1.93%
Restaurants (full and
limited service)
17,090,835
27.07%
18,337,784
27.70%
7.30%
Sports Venues
38,154
0.06%
39,702
0.10%
4.06%
Hospitals
301,576
0.48%
298,576
0.50%
-0.99%
Nursing Homes
451,124
0.71%
415,591
0.60%
-7.88%
Military Installations
61,373
0.10%
62,627
0.10%
2.04%
Office Buildings
4,065,145
6.44%
4,093,447
6.20%
0.70%
Correctional Facilities
440,679
0.70%
425,232
0.60%
-3.51%
Colleges and Universities
613,106
0.97%
624,371
0.90%
1.84%
K-12 Schools
1,244,353
1.97%
1,248,532
1.90%
0.34%
Food Banks1
426,057
N/A
473,027
N/A
11.02%
TOTAL GENERATION (Food
Retail, Food Service,
Residential)
63,132,123
N/A
66,216,242
N/A
4.89%
Manufacturing/Processing
39,821,247
38.68%
40,050,707
37.69%
0.58%
1 Food waste from food banks is not added to total generation because it would represent "double counting," i.e., it is already accounted for in Total Generation.
30
-------
Table 9. Comparison of 2018 and 2019 Wasted Food Management Estimates for the Food Retail, Food Service, Residential, and Food Bank Sectors
MANAGEMENT PATHWAY
2018 QUANTITY
MANAGED
(TONS)
2018 PERCENTAGE
MANAGED
2019 QUANTITY
MANAGED
(TONS)
2019
PERCENTAGE
MANAGED
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
BETWEEN 2018 AND 2019
Donation1
4,787,378
7.60%
5,135,293
7.76%
7.27%
Animal Feed
1,814,984
2.90%
1,516,771
2.29%
-16.43%
Bio-based Materials/
Biochemical Processing
1,841,411
2.90%
2,335,988
3.53%
-21.17%
Anaerobic Digestion
5,262,857
8.30%
538,539
0.81%
-89.77%
Composting
2,592,566
4.10%
3,304,764
4.99%
27.47%
Land Application
259,448
0.40%
141,371
0.21%
-45.51%
Controlled Combustion
7,552,705
12.00%
9,646,263
14.57%
27.72%
Landfill
35,277,543
55.90%
39,621,902
59.84%
12.31%
Sewer/ Wastewater
Treatment
3,743,229
5.90%
3,975,352
6.00%
6.20%
TOTAL
63,132,123
100%
66,216,242
100%
4.89%
1 Excludes portion of donations (473,027 tons) that could not be used and were re-routed to the other management pathways.
31
-------
Table 10. Comparison of 2018 and 2019 Wasted Food Management Estimates for the Food Manufacturing and Processing Sector
MANAGEMENT PATHWAY
2018
QUANTITY
MANAGED
(TONS)
2018 PERCENTAGE MANAGED
2019
QUANTITY
MANAGED
(TONS)
2019
PERCENTAGE
MANAGED
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
BETWEEN 2018 AND
2019
Donation
3,411,578
8.57%
2,205,990
5.51%
-35.34%
Animal Feed
19,579,841
49.17%
13,709,339
34.23%
-29.98%
Bio-based Materials/Biochemical
Processing
345,461
0.87%
64,737
0.16%
-433.64%
Anaerobic Digestion
5,508,940
13.83%
17,055,531
42.58%
67.70%
Composting
862,707
2.17%
583,305
1.46%
-47.90%
Land Application
8,627,526
21.67%
5,183,851
12.94%
-66.43%
Controlled Combustion
189,101
0.47%
330,326
0.82%
42.75%
Landfill
1,296,094
3.25%
917,630
2.29%
-41.24%
Sewer/ Wastewater Treatment
-
-
-
-
-
TOTAL
39,821,247
100%
40,050,707
100%
0.57%
32
-------
7
CAVEATS AND UNCERTAINTIES
There are caveats and uncertainties associated with the estimates provided in this report, which include the
following:11
• Lack of empirical data in some sectors. EPA sought to incorporate original, empirical studies of
generation factors. In several sectors, however, the research highlights a shortage of literature
providing such generation factors. Instead, many generation studies rely upon a relatively small set
of widely cited empirical studies. Relative to their role in overall generation, key sectors with a lack
of empirical data include food manufacturing and processing, supercenters (distinct from
supermarkets), food wholesalers, and office buildings.
• Current generation may be overestimated. In recent years, states and municipalities have
introduced rules banning landfilling of organics (including food) or mandating that organic wastes be
recycled. At the time of this report drafting, bans or mandate related laws had been enacted in
California, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont,
Washington, the District of Columbia and the cities of Austin, Boulder, Honolulu, Minneapolis, New
York City, San Francisco, and Seattle. Many of the generation studies applied in the methodology
precede some of these bans. Therefore, as bans continue to take effect and be implemented through
increased source reduction, the methodology may overstate current generation, and may become
increasingly biased overtime.
• Generation studies do not exist for all sectors. EPA's methodology is limited to sectors for which
original generation rate studies exist, and those sectors likely account for the majority of wasted food
in the U.S. However, it is possible that non-negligible quantities of wasted food originate in sectors
not included, including theme parks, fairs, and exposition centers.
• Uncertainty regarding revenue from e-commerce. There is some uncertainty associated with the
new estimated food and beverage revenue from businesses whose primary function is e-commerce
(NAICS 4541) in the wholesale category of the food retail sector. The Annual Retail Trade Survey e-
Commerce supplemental document provides a breakdown of e-commerce, with one line being food
and beverage sales. However, there is some uncertainty with sector delineations of NAICS 4541 at
the 3-digit level due to the survey's amount of sampling error and non-sampling error. Additionally,
for NAICS 4541 alcohol sales are not separated out from other food and beverage sales, and so this
revenue could be overestimating wasted food.
• Composting and anaerobic digestion may be underestimated. Composting and anaerobic digestion
represent growing alternatives to food waste disposal in landfills and combustion facilities. Although
new survey data allow improved characterization of composting and anaerobic digestion quantities,
uncertainties remain. EPA did not extrapolate to account for states that do not publicly provide food
waste composting estimates, nor do the estimates account for backyard and community composting,
so the national composting estimate is likely an underestimate. Anaerobic digestion quantities may
also be understated given that only 99 of the 275 anaerobic digestion facilities nationwide responded
to EPA's survey (EPA, 2023), only 89 of the 275 responded regarding the amount food waste they
processed, and EPA did not extrapolate to account for the additional facilities. It is notable that the
11 For detailed caveats and limitations associated with each sector, please refer to "Wasted Food Measurement
Methodology Scoping Memo" (EPA, 2020a).
33
-------
survey collecting 2019 data had a much lower participation rate of 36 percent, as compared to the
previous survey collecting 2018 and 2017 data that had a 67 percent participation rate.
• Food donation may be overestimated. There is some uncertainty in the specific amounts of excess
food being donated which could lead to overestimation of this value. Feeding America reports
donated meals by sector and these meals are then translated to a weight per meal metric. These
meal donations could include food that would otherwise be wasted as well as other donations from
the food manufacturing and processing, food retail, and food service sectors. The Feeding America
network includes 200 food banks, which are larger warehouses, some of which donate to smaller
food pantries or soup kitchens. The tonnage received per Feeding America facility was extrapolated
to the total number of food banks nationally (1,270, based on data available from Hoovers, 2019),
which resulted in an estimate of 7.8 million tons. However, it is likely that the food banks in Feeding
America's network operate on a larger scale than many food banks that are not in the Feeding
America network, which could potentially lead to an overestimate nationally. The final estimate of
7.8 million tons for all sectors is significantly higher than the initial estimate of approximately 2.8
million tons that was based on management distributions based on percent of generated wasted
food that is donated (Food Waste Reduction Alliance, 2016).
• Lack of data on food waste sent to sewer/wastewater. The amount of food waste being sent to
sewer/wastewater treatment facilities remains poorly characterized. Few studies provide
information on the prevalence of in-sink disposals in households and restaurants, or on in-sink
disposal usage behavior. In addition, biosolids generated at treatment plants are often subsequently
managed through land application or anaerobic digestion, suggesting that the sewer/wastewater
treatment plants may be best viewed as temporary collection points rather than a true management
destination for food waste. Given the lack of specific data on the routing of food waste from the
sewer/wastewater pathway to other management sectors, EPA did not revise the amount of food
waste initially estimated to go to sewer/wastewater treatment facilities.
While the estimates contained in this report reflect 2019 data, which is prior to the start of the covid-19
pandemic, EPA is evaluating available information regarding the effects of the pandemic on wasted food
generation and management. These findings will be incorporated into future estimates for 2020 and
beyond.
8 REFERENCES
American Hospital Association. (2021). Fast Facts on US Hospitals, 2021 (with data from 2019).
https://www.aha.org/system/files/media/file/2021/01/Fast-Facts-2021-table-FY19-data-
14jan21.pdf
Ballpark Digest. (2019). 2019 Affiliated Attendance by Average. Ballpark Digest.
https://ballparkdigest.com/2019/09/09/2019-affiliated-attendance-by-average/
Ballparks of Baseball. (2019). MLB Ballpark Attendance. Ballparks of Baseball.
https://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/baseball-ballpark-attendance/
Business for Social Responsibility. (2013). Analysis of U.S. Food Waste Among Food Manufacturers,
Retailers, and Wholesalers. Business for Social Responsibility.
http://www.kbcsandbox3.com/fw/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/FWRA_BSR_Tier2_FINAL.pdf
Business for Social Responsibility. (2014). Analysis of U.S. Food Waste Among Food Manufacturers,
Retailers, and Restaurants, http://www.kbcsandbox3.com/fw/wp-
content/uploads/2013/06/FWRA_BSR_Tier2_FINAL.pdf
34
-------
Defense Manpower Data Center. (2019). DMDC Personnel—December 2019.
https://dwp.dmdc.osd.mil/dwp/app/dod-data-reports/workforce-reports
Energy Information Administration (EIA). (2019). About the Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption
Survey (CBECS). https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/data/2018/bc/html/bl2.php
Energy Recovery Council (ERC). (2018). 2018 Directory of Waste-to-Energy Facilities.
http://energyrecoverycouncil.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/ERC-2018-directory.pdf
(2015). United States 2030 Food Loss and Waste Reduction Goal, https://www.epa.gov/sustainable-
management-food/united-states-2030-food-loss-and-waste-reduction-goal
(2019). Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2017 Fact Sheet. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2019-
ll/documents/2017 facts and figures fact sheet final.pdf
(2020a). Wasted Food Measurement Methodology Scoping Memo. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-
06/documents/food_measurement_methodology_scoping_memo-6-18-20.pdf
(2020b). Advancing Sustainable Materials Management: 2018 Fact Sheet. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/facts-and-figures-about-materials-waste-and-
recycling/advancing-sustainable-materials-management
(2020c). 2018 Wasted Food Report, https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-
ll/documents/2018 wasted food report-11-9-20 final .pdf
(2021). From Farm to Kitchen: The Environmental Impacts of U.S. Food Waste.
https://www.epa.gov/land-research/farm-kitchen-environmental-impacts-us-food-waste
(2022). The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law: Transforming U.S. Recycling and Waste Management.
https://www.epa.gov/infrastructure/bipartisan-infrastructure-law-transforming-us-recycling-and-
waste-management
(2023). Anaerobic Digestion Facilities Processing Food Waste in the United States (2019).
https://www.epa.gov/anaerobic-digestion/anaerobic-digestion-facilities-processing-food-waste-
u nited-states-su rvey
ESPN. (2019). NHL Attendance Report 2018-19. ESPN, https://www.espn.com/nhl/attendance/_/year/2019
Feeding America. (2019). Feeding America 2019 Annual Report.
https://www.feedingamerica.org/sites/default/files/2020-06/FA_2019_AnnReport_d8.pdf
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2019). The State of Food and Agriculture 2019:
Moving forward on food loss and waste reduction. https://www.fao.Org/3/ca6030en/ca6030en.pdf
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2023). Sustainable Development Goals.
https://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/indicators/1231/en/
Food Loss and Waste Protocol. (2016). Food Loss and Waste Accounting and Reporting Standard. Food Loss
and Waste Protocol, https://flwprotocol.org/wp-
content/uploads/2017/05/FLW_Standard_final_2016.pdf
Food Waste Reduction Alliance. (2016). Analysis of U.S. Food Waste Among Food Manufacturers, Retailers,
and Restaurants. Food Waste Reduction Alliance, https://foodwastealliance.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/05/FWRA-Food-Waste-Survey-2016-Report_Final.pdf
Harvard Food Law and Policy Clinic. (2022). New Policies to Spur Food Waste Reduction: Policy Finder Tool
from ReFED and FLPC Provides Insights, https://chlpi.org/news-and-events/news-and-
commentary/commentary/new-policies-to-spur-food-waste-reduction-policy-finder-tool-from-
refed-and-flpc-provides-insights/
Hoovers. (2019). Community Food Services.
Inside Hoops. (2019). NBA Attendance Info. Inside Hoops, http://www.insidehoops.com/attendance.shtml
Minton, T. D., Beatty, L. G., & Zeng, Z. (2021). Correctional Populations in the United States, 2019 -
Statistical Tables. Https://Bjs.Ojp.Gov/Library/Publications/Correctional-Populations-United-States-
2019-Statistical-Tables. https://bis.oip.gov/librarv/publications/correctional-populations-united-
states-2019-statistical-tables
35
EPA.
EPA.
EPA.
EPA.
EPA.
EPA.
EPA.
EPA.
-------
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019a). Table 105.20 Enrollment in public elementary and
secondary schools, by level, grade, and state or jurisdiction: Fall 2019. National Center for Education
Statistics, https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/dl9/tables/dtl9_105.20.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2019b). Table 301.10. Enrollment, staff, and degrees/certificates
conferred in degree-granting and non-degree-granting postsecondary institutions—2019. National
Center for Education Statistics, https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d20/tables/dt20_301.10.asp
National Center for Health Statistics. (2021, November 10). NPALS - 2018 Reports.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/npals/reports.htm
National Center for Health Statistics (U.S.). (2019). Long-term care providers and services users in the United
States, 2015-2016.
NCAA. (2019a). 2019 Football Attendance.
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/Attendance/2019.pdf
NCAA. (2019b). Attendance Records. http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/m_basketball_RB/2020/Attendance.pdf
Re-TRAC. (2019). U.S. State Data Measurement Sharing Program (SMP).
https://www.epa.gov/smm/sustainable-materials-management-us-state-data-measurement-
sharing-program
Soccer Stadium Digest. (2019). 2019 MLS Attendance. Soccer Stadium Digest.
https://soccerstadiumdigest.com/2019-mls-attendance/
Statista. (2022). Hospital occupancy rate U.S. 1975-2017. Statista.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/185904/hospital-occupancy-rate-in-the-us-since-2001/
United Nations. (2019). National 2030 Food Loss and Waste Reduction Goal, and Sustainable Development
Goal Target 12.3. https://sdgl2hub.org/sdg-12-hub/see-progress-on-sdg-12-by-target/123-food-
loss-waste
United Nations. (2022). International Day of Awareness on Food Loss and Waste Reduction- Background.
https://www.un.org/en/observances/end-food-waste-day/background
United Nations Environment Programme. (2021). Food Waste Index Report 2021.
https://www.unep.org/resources/report/unep-food-waste-index-report-2021
United States Census Bureau. (2021). Historical Households Tables (2019). Census.Gov.
https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/families/households.html
United States Census Bureau. (2021a). 2018-2020 Annual Survey of Manufacturers.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=aml831&n=N0000.00&tid=ASMAREA2017. AM 1831BASIC0
l&nkd=YEAR~2019
United States Census Bureau. (2022). Annual Retail Trade Survey: 2019. Census.Gov.
https://www.census.gov/data/tables/2019/econ/arts/annual-report.html
United States Census Bureau. (2022a). 2019 Census Bureau Tables—2019 Census Bureau Tables.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=CBP2019.CB1900CBP&n=4244
United States Census Bureau. (2022b). 2019 Census Bureau Tables—2019 Census Bureau Tables.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=CBP2019.CB1900CBP&n=445110%3A445120%3A445210%
3A445220%3A445230%3A445291%3A445292%3A445299&tid=CBP2019.CB1900CBP
United States Census Bureau. (2022c). 2019 Census Bureau Tables—2019 Census Bureau Tables.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=CBP2019.CB1900CBP&n=452311
United States Census Bureau. (2022d). 2019 Census Bureau Tables—2019 Census Bureau Tables.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=CBP2019.CB1900CBP&n=445110%3A445120%3A445210%
3A445220%3A445230%3A445291%3A445292%3A445299&tid=CBP2019.CB1900CBP AND United
States Census Bureau. (2022). 2019 Census Bureau Tables—County Business Patterns.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=CBP2019.CB1900CBP&n=452311
United States Census Bureau. (2022e). 2019 Census Bureau Tables—2019 Census Bureau Tables.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=CBP2019.CB1900CBP&n=7211
United States Census Bureau. (2022f). 2019 Census Bureau Tables—2019 Census Bureau Tables.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=CBP2019.CB1900CBP&n=722320%3A722330%3A722511%
3A722513%3A722514%3A722515&tid=CBP2019.CB1900CBP
36
-------
United States Census Bureau. (2022g). 2019 Census Bureau Tables—2019 Census Bureau Tables.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=CBP2019.CB1900CBP&n=722320%3A722330%3A722511%
3A722513%3A722514%3A722515&tid=CBP2019.CB1900CBP
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2022). Employment by Major Industry Sector.
https://www.bls.gov/emp/tables/employment-by-major-industry-sector.htm
U.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service. (2021). National School Lunch- Participation and
Meals Served—2019. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d21/tables/dt21_203.45.asp
USCH. (2019). Men's Division 1 Hockey Attendance: 2019-2019. USCH.
https://www.uscho.com/stats/attendance/division-i-men/2018-2019/
37
-------
9 APPENDIX
9.1 GLOSSARY
Animal Feed: Diverting material from the food supply chain (directly or after processing) to animals (excludes
crops intentionally grown for bioenergy, animal feed, seed, or industrial use). (Food Loss and Waste Protocol,
2016)
Bio-based Materials/Biochemical Processing: Converting material into industrial products. Examples include
creating fibers for packaging material, creating bioplastics (e.g., polylactic acid), making "traditional"
materials such as leather or feathers (e.g., for pillows), and rendering fat, oil, or grease into a raw material to
make products such as soaps, biodiesel, or cosmetics. "Biochemical processing" does not refer to anaerobic
digestion or production of bioethanol through fermentation. (Food Loss and Waste Protocol, 2016)
Codigestion/anaerobic digestion12: Breaking down material via bacteria in the absence of oxygen. This
process generates biogas and nutrient-rich matter. Codigestion refers to the simultaneous anaerobic
digestion of food loss and waste and other organic material in one digester. This destination includes
fermentation (converting carbohydrates—such as glucose, fructose, and sucrose—via microbes into alcohols
in the absence of oxygen to create products such as biofuels). (Food Loss and Waste Protocol, 2016) Often
referred to as "anaerobic digestion" or "AD".
Composting/aerobic processes: Breaking down material via bacteria in oxygen-rich environments.
Composting refers to the production of organic material (via aerobic processes) that can be used as a soil
amendment. (Food Loss and Waste Protocol, 2016) Often referred to as simply "composting".
Controlled combustion: Sending material to a facility that is specifically designed for combustion in a
controlled manner, which may include some form of energy recovery (this may also be referred to as
incineration). (Food Loss and Waste Protocol, 2016)
Excess food: Food that is donated to feed people.
Food: Any substance—whether processed, semi-processed, or raw—that is intended for human
consumption. "Food" includes drink, and any substance that has been used in the manufacture, preparation,
or treatment of food. "Food" also includes material that has spoiled and is therefore no longer fit for human
consumption. It does not include cosmetics, tobacco, or substances used only as drugs. It does not include
processing agents used along the food supply chain, for example, water to clean or cook raw materials in
factories or at home. (Food Loss and Waste Protocol, 2016). Throughout this document, EPA uses the term
"food" as a shorthand to refer to both "food" and "inedible parts".
Food donation: Collection and redistribution of unspoiled excess food to feed people through food pantries,
food banks and other food rescue programs.
Food loss: This term often refers to unused product from the agricultural sector, such as unharvested crops.
For purposes of Sustainable Development Goal Target 12.3, food loss occurs from production up to (and not
including) the retail level (FAO, 2023).
Food waste: Food and inedible parts not ultimately consumed by humans that are discarded or recycled,
such as plate waste (i.e., food that has been served but not eaten), spoiled food, or peels and rinds considered
12 Anaerobic digestion may occur in a standalone facility dedicated for food waste or it may occur when food waste is
added to an existing digester that accepts other types of organic material.
38
-------
inedible. For purposes of Sustainable Development Goal Target 12.3, food waste occurs at the retail and
consumer-facing levels and is managed by landfill; controlled combustion; sewer; litter, discards and refuse;
co/anaerobic digestion; compost/aerobic digestion; and land application (FAO, 2023; UNEP, 2021).
Inedible parts: Components associated with a food that, in a particular food supply chain, are not intended
to be consumed by humans. Examples of inedible parts associated with food could include bones, rinds, and
pits/stones. "Inedible parts" do not include packaging. What is considered inedible varies among users (e.g.,
chicken feet are consumed in some food supply chains but not others), changes over time, and is influenced
by a range of variables including culture, socio-economic factors, availability, price, technological advances,
international trade, and geography. (Food Loss and Waste Protocol, 2016)
Land Application: Spreading, spraying, injecting, or incorporating organic material onto or below the surface
of the land to enhance soil quality. (Food Loss and Waste Protocol, 2016)
Landfill: Sending material to an area of land or an excavated site that is specifically designed and built to
receive wastes. (Food Loss and Waste Protocol, 2016)
Sewer/wastewater treatment: Sending material down the sewer (with or without prior treatment), including
that which may go to a facility designed to treat wastewater. (Food Loss and Waste Protocol, 2016)
Wasted food: Food that was not used for its intended purpose and is managed in a variety of ways, such as
donation to feed people, creation of animal feed, composting, anaerobic digestion, or disposal in landfills or
combustion facilities. Examples include unsold food from retail stores; plate waste, uneaten prepared food,
or kitchen trimmings from restaurants, cafeterias, and households; or by-products from food and beverage
processing facilities. The term wasted food can be used to refer to both excess food and food waste.
39
-------
9.2 SECTOR-SPECIFIC REFERENCES
The following is a list of references used for each sector. For more information on generation factors and studies used to estimate generation, please
refer to "Wasted Food Measurement Methodology" (U.S. EPA, 2020b), Section 6.2.
9.2.1 Food Manufacturing and Processing Sector
TITLE
AUTHOR OR AGENCY
PUBLICATION
YEAR
WEBLINK
Identifying, Quantifying, and Mapping Food
Residuals from Connecticut Business and
Institutions
Connecticut DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc. and
Atlantic Geoscience Corp.)
Connecticut DEP
2001
https://portal.ct.gov/-
/media/DEEP/compost/ssomfile/ssomreportpdf.pdf?la=e
n
Analysis of U.S. Food Waste Among Food
Manufacturers, Retailers, and Restaurants
Food Waste Reduction
Alliance (BSR)
BSR
2014
https://foodwastealliance.org/wp-
content/uoloads/2020/05/FWRA BSR Tier3 FINAL.odf
Identification, characterization, and mapping
of food waste and food waste generators in
Massachusetts
Massachusetts DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc.)
Massachusetts
DEP
2002
https://www.mass.gov/doc/studv-identification-
characterization-mapping-of-food-waste-generators-in-
massachusetts-2002/download
2014 Generator-Based Characterization of
Commercial Sector Disposal and Diversion in
California
CalRecycle (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2015
httDs://www2.calrecvcle.ca.sov/Publications/Details/154
3
Analysis of U.S. Food Waste Among Food
Manufacturers, Retailers, and Wholesalers
BSR
BSR
2013
http://www.kbcsandbox3.com/fw/wp-
content/uploads/2013/06/FWRA BSR Tier2 FINAL.pdf
2014 ICI Waste Characterization Program
Tetra Tech for Metro
Vancouver
Metro Vancouver
2015
http://www.metrovancouver.org/services/solid-
waste/SolidWastePublications/FinalReoort-
2014ICIWasteCharacterizationProsram3-Jun-15.Ddf
Analysis of U.S. Food Waste Among Food
Manufacturers, Retailers, and Restaurants
(2016)
Food Waste Reduction
Alliance
Food Waste
Reduction
Alliance
2016
httDs://foodwastealliance.ors/wD-
content/uploads/2020/05/FWRA-Food-Waste-Survev-
2016-Report Final.pdf
9.2.2 Residential Sector
TITLE
AUTHOR OR AGENCY
PUBLICATION
YEAR
WEBLINK
State of Vermont Waste Composition Study
Vermont DEC (DSM
Environmental Services,
MidAtlantic Solid Waste
Consultants)
Vermont DEC
2013
httDs://dec.vermont.sov/sites/dec/files/wmD/SolidWaste
/Documents/finalreportvermontwastecompositionl3mav
2013.pdf
King County Solid Waste Division: Organics
Study
King County Department of
Natural Resources and Parks
(Cascadia Consulting Group)
King County
Department of
Natural
Resources and
Parks
2009
httDs://kinscountv.sov/~/media/deDts/dnrD/solid-
waste/Earbase-recvclins/documents/OrEanics-Studv-
2009-final-report.ashx?la=en
Best Management Practices in Food Scraps
Program
U.S. EPA Region 5 (Juri
Freeman and Lisa Skumatz,
Econservation Institute)
U.S. EPA Region
5
2011
https://studylib.net/doc/8407390/best-management-
practices-in-food-scraps-programs
40
-------
TITLE
AUTHOR OR AGENCY
PUBLICATION
YEAR
WEBLINK
2011 Iowa Statewide Waste Characterization
Study
Iowa Department of Natural
Resources (MSW
Consultants)
Iowa
Department of
Natural
Resources
2011
www.iowadnr.sov/Portals/idnr/uDloads/waste/wastechar
acterization2011.odf
Montgomery County Waste Composition
Study: Summary of Results
Montgomery County
Division of Solid Waste
Services (Prepared by SCS
Engineers)
Montgomery
County Division
of Solid Waste
Services
2013
httDs://www.montsomervcountvmd.sov/sws/resources/fi
les/studies/waste-composition-studv-130726.pdf
City of San Diego Waste Characterization
Study 2012-2013
City of San Diego (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
City of San Diego
2014
httDsV/www.sandieso.Eov/sites/default/files/lesacv/envi
ronmental-services/Ddf/recvclins/ComDMultiFam.Ddf
2014 Residential Waste Stream Composition
Study: Final Report
Seattle Public Utilities
(prepared by Cascadia
Consulting Group)
Seattle Public
Utilities
2014
http://www.Seattle.gov/util/cs/groups/public/(S)spu/(S)ga
rbage/documents/webcontent/1 043661.pdf
2014 Generator-Based Characterization of
Commercial Sector Disposal and Diversion in
California
CalRecycle (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2015
httDs://www2.calrecvcle.ca.sov/Publications/Details/154
3
Source separated residential composting in
the U.S.
Yepsen, R., Goldstein, N.
BioCycle
2007
https://www.biocvcle.net/2007/12/19/source-separated-
residential-composting-in-the-u-s/
Residential food waste collection in the U.S.
Yepsen, R.
BioCycle
2013
https://www.biocvcle.net/2013/03/19/residential-food-
waste-collection-in-the-u-s-biocvcle-nationwide-survev/
Potentials for food waste minimization and
effects on potential biogas production
through anaerobic digestion
Schott, A. B. S., Vukicevic, S.,
Bohn, 1., & Andersson, T.
Waste
Management &
Research
2013
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23681829
Total and per capita value of food loss in the
United States
Buzby, J.C., Hyman, J.
Food Policy
2012
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S03069
19212000693
Assessing U.S. food wastage and
opportunities for reduction
Dou, Z., Ferguson, J.D.,
Galligan, D.T., Kelly, A.M.,
Finn, S.M., Giegengack, R.
Global Food
Security
2016
httos://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/Dii/S2211
912415300195
BioCycle nationwide survey: Residential food
waste collection in the U.S.
Yepsen, R.
BioCycle
2012
https://www.biocvcle.net/2012/01/12/residential-food-
waste-collection-in-the-u-s/
Food waste collection innovations
Goldstein, N.
BioCycle
2014
https://www.biocvcle.net/2014/07/15/food-waste-
collection-innovations/
Getting the public tuned in to food waste
reduction
Johnston, M.
BioCycle
2013
https://www.biocvcle.net/2013/ll/18/getting-the-public-
tuned-in-to-food-waste-reduction/
Residential food waste collection in the U.S.
Yepsen, R.
BioCycle
2015
https://www.biocvcle.net/2015/01/15/residential-food-
waste-collection-in-the-u-s-2/
Urban food waste generation: Challenges
and opportunities
Adhikari, B.K., Barrington,
S.F., Martinez, J.M.
International
Journal of
Environment and
Waste
Management
2009
httos://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00615443/document
The Estimated Amount, Value, and Calories
of Postharvest Food Losses at the Retail and
Consumer Levels in the United States
Buzby, J.C., Wells, H.F.,
Hyman, J.
USDA ERS
2014
https://www.ers.usda.gOv/webdocs/publications/43833/4
3680 eibm.odf
41
-------
TITLE
AUTHOR OR AGENCY
PUBLICATION
YEAR
WEBLINK
Food: Too Good to Waste An Evaluation
Report for the Consumption Workgroup of
the West Coast Climate and Materials
Management Forum
U.S. EPA
U.S. EPA
2016
httDs://www.eDa.sov/sites/Droduction/files/2016-
07/documents/ftstw finalreoort 7 19 16.odf
City of Boulder Food Waste Audit
Phillips, C., Hoenigman, R.,
Dansky, H.
Boulder Food
Rescue
2016
httDs://www.boulderfoodrescue.ors/wD-
content/uploads/2016/03/2916-Boulder-Food-Waste-
Audit.pdf
A Roadmap to Reduce U.S. Food Waste by 20
Percent
ReFED
ReFED
2016
https://www.refed.com/downloads/ReFED Report 2016.
Edf
2014 Disposal-Facility-Based
Characterization of Solid Waste in California
CalRecycle
CalRecycle
2015
httDs://www2.calrecvcle.ca.sov/Publications/Details/154
6
The environmental impacts of alternative
food waste treatment technologies in the
U.S.
Thyberg, K.L., Tonjes, D.J.
Journal of
Cleaner
Production
2017
htto://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/Dii/S09596
52617309149
Estimating quantities and types of food
waste at the city level
NRDC
NRDC
2017
https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/food-waste-citv-
level-reoort.odf
Global food losses and food waste
FAO
FAO
2011
httD://www.fao.ors/3/mb060e/mb060e00.Ddf
The food waste disposer as a municipal tool
for waste diversion: An evaluation in five
cities
InSinkErator
InSinkErator
2016
https://www.aham.org/AHAMdocs/Main%20Site/lnSinkEr
ator.odf
The Household Use of Food Waste Disposal
Units as a Waste Management Option: A
Review
lacovidou, E., Ohandja, D.,
Gronow, J., Voulvoulis, N.
Critical Reviews
in Environmental
Science and
Technology
2011
httDs://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1064338
9.2011.556897?iournalCode=best20&
PlaNYC: 2011 Full Report
NYC Mayor's Office of
Recovery & Resiliency
2011
httD://www.nvc.sov/html/Dlanvc/downloads/Ddf/Dublicat
ions/olanvc 2011 olanvc full reoort.odf
Residential Food Waste Collection Access in
the U.S.
Streeter, V., Piatt, B.
BioCycle
2017
https://www.biocvcle.net/2017/12/06/residential-food-
waste-collection-access-u-s/
Wasted Food Measurement Study - Oregon
Households
Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality
Oregon
Department of
Environmental
Quality
2019
https://www.oregon.gov/dea/mm/food/Pages/Wasted-
Food-Studv.aspx
42
-------
9.2.3 Food Retail Sector
TITLE
AUTHOR OR AGENCY
PUBLICATION
YEAR
WEBLINK
Identifying, Quantifying, and Mapping Food
Residuals from Connecticut Business and
Institutions
Connecticut DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc. and
Atlantic Geoscience Corp.)
Connecticut DEP
2001
httDs://Dortal.ct.sov/-
/media/DEEP/comDost/ssomfile/ssomreDortDdf.Ddf?la=e
n
Analysis of U.S. Food Waste Among Food
Manufacturers, Retailers, and Restaurants
Food Waste Reduction
Alliance (BSR)
BSR
2014
https://foodwastealliance.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/05/FWRA BSR Tier3 FINAL.pdf
Targeted statewide waste characterization
study: Waste disposal and diversion findings
for selected industry groups
California EPA (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2006
httDs://www2.calrecvcle.ca.sov/Publications/Details/118
4
Mecklenburg County Food Waste Diversion
Study
Mecklenburg County Solid
Waste (Kessler Consulting,
Inc.)
Mecklenburg
County Solid
Waste
2012
httDs://www.waste.ccacoalition.ors/file/1780/download?
token=HivwueDB
2014 Generator-Based Characterization of
Commercial Sector Disposal and Diversion in
California
CalRecycle (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2015
https://www2.calrecvcle.ca.gOv/WasteCharacterization/P
ubExtracts/2014/GenSummarv.odf
Characterization of food waste generators: A
Hawaii case study
Okazaki, W.K., Turn, S.Q.,
Flachsbart, P.G.
Waste
Management
2008
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18375111/
North Carolina 2012 Food Waste Generation
Study
North Carolina Department
of Environment and Natural
Resources
NC Department
of Environment
and Natural
Resources
2012
https://files.nc.gov/ncdea/North%20Carolina%202012%2
OFood%20Waste%20Generation%20Studv.odf
A Roadmap to Reduce U.S. Food Waste by
20 Percent
ReFED
ReFED
2016
https://www.refed.com/downloads/ReFED Report 2016.
fidf
Summary Analysis of Massachusetts
Commercial/Institutional Food Waste
Generation Data
EPA Region 1
U.S. EPA Region 1
2011
httDs://www.mass.sov/doc/summarv-analvsis-
massachusetts-commercialinstitutional-food-waste-
generation-data-2011/download
Estimating quantities and types of food
waste at the city level
NRDC
NRDC
2017
https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/food-waste-citv-
level-report.pdf
Analysis of U.S. Food Waste Among Food
Manufacturers, Retailers, and Wholesalers
BSR
BSR
2013
http://www.kbcsandbox3.com/fw/wp-
content/uploads/2013/06/FWRA BSR Tier2 FINAL.pdf
Analysis of U.S. Food Waste Among Food
Manufacturers, Retailers, and Restaurants
(2016)
Food Waste Reduction
Alliance
Food Waste
Reduction
Alliance
2016
httDs://foodwastealliance.ors/wD-
content/uDloads/2020/05/FWRA-Food-Waste-Survev-
2016-Report Final.pdf
43
-------
9.2.4 Food Service Sector
SECTOR
TITLE
AUTHOR OR AGENCY
PUBLICATION
YEAR
WEBLINK
Restaurants
Analysis of U.S. Food Waste Among Food
Manufacturers, Retailers, and Restaurants
Food Waste Reduction
Alliance (BSR)
BSR
2014
https://foodwastealliance.org/wp-
content/uoloads/2020/05/FWRA BSR Tier3 FINAL.odf
Targeted statewide waste characterization
study: Waste disposal and diversion findings
for selected industry groups
California EPA
(Cascadia Consulting
Group)
CalRecycle
2006
https://www2.calrecvcle.ca.gov/Publications/Details/1184
Identification, characterization, and mapping of
food waste and food waste generators in
Massachusetts
Massachusetts DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc.)
Massachusetts
DEP
2002
https://www.mass.gov/doc/studv-identification-
characterization-maDDins-of-food-waste-senerators-in-
massachusetts-2002/download
2014 Generator-Based Characterization of
Commercial Sector Disposal and Diversion in
California
CalRecycle (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2015
https://www2.calrecvcle.ca.gov/Publications/Details/1543
Characterization of food waste generators: A
Hawaii case study
Okazaki, W.K., Turn,
S.Q., Flachsbart, P.G.
Waste
Management
2008
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18375111/
North Carolina 2012 Food Waste Generation
Study
North Carolina
Department of
Environment and
Natural Resources
North Carolina
Department of
Environment
and Natural
Resources
2012
httDs://files.nc.sov/ncdea/North%20Carolina%202012%20Foo
d%20Waste%20Generation%20Studv.pdf
Summary Analysis of Massachusetts
Commercial/Institutional Food Waste
Generation Data
EPA Region 1
U.S. EPA Region
1
2011
httDs://www.mass.sov/doc/summarv-analvsis-massachusetts-
commercialinstitutional-food-waste-seneration-data-
2011/download
Feasibility Study on Food Waste Generated in
Columbia, South Carolina
Battelle
2015
Hotels
Targeted statewide waste characterization
study: Waste disposal and diversion findings
for selected industry groups
California EPA
(Cascadia Consulting
Group)
CalRecycle
2006
httDs://www2.calrecvcle.ca.sov/Publications/Details/1184
2014 Generator-Based Characterization of
Commercial Sector Disposal and Diversion in
California
CalRecycle (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2015
https://www2.calrecvcle.ca.gov/Publications/Details/1543
Characterization of food waste generators: A
Hawaii case study
Okazaki, W.K., Turn,
S.Q., Flachsbart, P.G.
Waste
Management
2008
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18375111/
2014 ICI Waste Characterization Program
Tetra Tech for Metro
Vancouver
Metro
Vancouver
2015
httD://www.metrovancouver.ors/services/solid-
waste/SolidWastePublications/FinalReport-
2014ICIWasteCharacterizationProgram3-Jun-15.pdf
Sports
venues
Targeted statewide waste characterization
study: Waste disposal and diversion findings
for selected industry groups
California EPA
(Cascadia Consulting
Group)
CalRecycle
2006
https://www2.calrecvcle.ca.gov/Publications/Details/1184
2014 Generator-Based Characterization of
Commercial Sector Disposal and Diversion in
California
CalRecycle (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2015
httDs://www2.calrecvcle.ca.sov/Publications/Details/1543
44
-------
SECTOR
TITLE
AUTHOR OR AGENCY
PUBLICATION
YEAR
WEBLINK
Achieving sustainability beyond zero waste: A
case study from a college football stadium
Costello, C.,
McGarvey, R.G.,
Birisci, E.
Sustainability
2017
https://www.mdpi.eom/2071-1050/9/7/1236
Identifying, Quantifying, and Mapping Food
Residuals from Connecticut Business and
Institutions
Connecticut DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc.
and Atlantic
Geoscience Corp.)
Connecticut DEP
2001
https://portal.ct.gov/-
/media/DEEP/comDost/ssomfile/ssomreDortDdf.Ddf?la=en
Collection of Recyclables from Multifamily
Housing and Business
Walsh, P. Pferdehirt,
W., & O'Leary, P.
Waste Age
1993
https://p2infohouse.org/ref/08/07954.pdf
Identification, characterization, and mapping
of food waste and food waste generators in
Massachusetts
Massachusetts DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc.)
Massachusetts
DEP
2002
https://www.mass.gov/doc/studv-identification-
characterization-mapping-of-food-waste-generators-in-
massachusetts-2002/download
2014 Generator-Based Characterization of
Commercial Sector Disposal and Diversion in
California
CalRecycle (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2015
httDs://www2.calrecvcle.ca.sov/Publications/Details/1543
Hospitals
Practical Plan For Hospital Food Waste
Recovery
Chardoul, N.,
Coddington, B.
BioCycle
2012
https://www.biocvcle.net/practical-plan-for-hospital-food-
waste-recovery/
North Carolina 2012 Food Waste Generation
North Carolina
Department of
North Carolina
Department of
Environment
and Natural
Resources
2012
httDs://files.nc.sov/ncdea/North%20Carolina%202012%20Foo
Study
Environment and
Natural Resources
d%20Waste%20Generation%20Studv.pdf
Food Scrap Generator Database Calculations
Vermont Agency of
Natural Resources
Vermont Agency
of Natural
Resources
2018
httD://dec.vermont.sov/sites/dec/files/wmD/SolidWaste/Doc
uments/Universal-Recvcling/FoodScrapVolume Estimator.pdf
Comparing Food Provided and Wasted before
and after Implementing Measures against Food
Waste in Three Healthcare Food Service
Facilities
Strotmann, C.,
Friedrich, S.,
Kreyenschmidt, J.,
Teitscheid, P., Ritter,
G.
Sustainability
2017
www.mdpi.eom/2071-1050/9/8/1409/pdf
45
-------
SECTOR
TITLE
AUTHOR OR AGENCY
PUBLICATION
YEAR
WEBLINK
Nursing
Homes
Identification, characterization, and mapping
of food waste and food waste generators in
Massachusetts
Massachusetts DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc.)
Massachusetts
DEP
2002
httDs://www.mass.sov/doc/studv-identification-
characterization-mapping-of-food-waste-generators-in-
massachusetts-2002/download
Comparing Food Provided and Wasted before
and after Implementing Measures against Food
Waste in Three Healthcare Food Service
Facilities
Strotmann, C.,
Friedrich, S.,
Kreyenschmidt, J.,
Teitscheid, P., Ritter,
G.
Sustainability
2017
www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/8/1409/pdf
Comparison of waste composition in a
continuing-care retirement community
Kim, T., Shanklin, C.
W., Su, A. Y., Hackes,
B. L., & Ferris, D.
1997
httDs://Dubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.sov/9120193/
Military
Installations
Feasibility Study on Food Waste Generated in
Columbia, South Carolina
Battelle
2015
Integrating food waste diversion into food
systems planning: A case study of the
Mississippi Gulf Coast
Evans-Cowley, J.S.,
Arroyo-Rodriguez, A.
2013
https://www.foodsvstemsiournal.org/index.php/fsi/article/vie
w/179
Office
Buildings
Targeted statewide waste characterization
study: Waste disposal and diversion findings
for selected industry groups
California EPA
(Cascadia Consulting
Group)
CalRecycle
2006
httDs://www2.calrecvcle.ca.sov/Publications/Details/1184
2014 Generator-Based Characterization of
Commercial Sector Disposal and Diversion in
California
CalRecycle (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2015
httDs://www2.calrecvcle.ca.sov/Publications/Details/1543
2014 ICI Waste Characterization Program
Tetra Tech for Metro
Vancouver
Metro
Vancouver
2015
httD://www.metrovancouver.ors/services/solid-
waste/SolidWastePublications/FinalReport-
2014ICIWasteCharacterizationProgram3-Jun-15.pdf
Correctional
facilities
Identifying, Quantifying, and Mapping Food
Residuals from Connecticut Business and
Institutions
CT DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc.
and Atlantic
Geoscience Corp.)
Connecticut DEP
2001
httDs://Dortal.ct.sov/-
/media/DEEP/comDost/ssomfile/ssomreDortDdf.Ddf?la=en
New York State Department of Correctional
Services (DOCS)
U.S. EPA
U.S. EPA
1998
https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZvPURL.CEi?Dockev=P1004U0A.TXT
Waste Reduction and Recycling Guide for
Florida Correctional Facilities
FL DEP (Kessler
Consulting Inc.)
Florida DEP
2004
http://www.businessperformance.orE/sites/default/files/finalp
risonguide-72ppi.pdf
Composting 12,000 tons of food residuals per
year
Marion, J.
BioCycle
2000
Food Waste at Correctional Facilities
CalRecycle
CalRecycle
2018
https://www.calrecvcle.ca.Eov/StateAEencv/AEencvType/Corre
ctional
Correctional Facility Composting In Washington
State
Mendrey, K.
BioCycle
2013
https://www.biocvcle.net/correctional-facilitv-compostinE-in-
washington-state/
Food Scraps to Orchard Amendment at
Philadelphia Prison
Goldstein, N.
BioCycle
2015
https://www.biocvcle.net/2015/09/17/food-scraps-to-orchard-
amendment-at-philadelphia-prison-complex/
Colleges and
Universities
Identifying, Quantifying, and Mapping Food
Residuals from Connecticut Business and
Institutions
Connecticut DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc.
and Atlantic
Geoscience Corp.)
Connecticut DEP
2001
https://portal.ct.gov/-
/media/DEEP/comDost/ssomfile/ssomreDortDdf.Ddf?la=en
46
-------
SECTOR
TITLE
AUTHOR OR AGENCY
PUBLICATION
YEAR
WEBLINK
2014 Generator-Based Characterization of
Commercial Sector Disposal and Diversion in
California
CalRecycle (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2015
https://www2.calrecvcle.ca.gov/Publications/Details/1543
Composting feasibility study for the Randolph-
Macon College Dining Facility
Virginia Department
of Environmental
Quality (The Vannet
Group)
The Vannet
Group, LLC
2008
Research and Solutions: AASHE Student Award-
Winning Paper: Converting Food Waste to
Biogas
Graunke, R., Wilkie, A.
Sustainability
2008
httDs://Ddfs.semanticscholar.ors/779f/08150db72ef3c39f2e37
ff5f5327119ed274.pdf
Estimating the biogas potential from colleges
and universities
Ebner, J., Win, S.S.,
Hegde, S., Vadney, S.,
Williamson, A.,
Trabold, T.
The American
Society of
Mechanical
Engineers
(ASME)
2014
http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/proceeding
.aspx?articleid=1920668
Food and non-edible, compostable waste in a
University dining facility
Sarjahani, A., Serrano,
E.L., Johnson, R.
Journal of
Hunger &
Environmental
Nutrition
2009
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/193202408027
06874
Impact on Plate Waste of Switching from a Tray
to a Trayless Delivery System in a University
Dining Hall and Employee Response to the
Switch
Thiagarajah, K., Getty,
V.M.
Eat Right
2013
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23088899
Energy recovery from waste food by
combustion or gasification with the potential
for regenerative dehydration: A case study
Caton, P.A., Carr,
M.A., Kim, S.S.,
Beautyman, M.J.
Energy
Conversion and
Management
2010
httD://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/Dii/S019689040
9005317
Quantifying the Impact of Going Trayless in a
University Dining Hall
Kim, K., Morawski, S.
Journal of
Hunger &
Environmental
Nutrition
2012
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/19320248.2012
.732918
Written Messages Improve Edible Food Waste
Behaviors in a University Dining Facility
Whitehair, K.J.,
Shanklin, C.W.,
Brannon, L.A.
Eat Right
2013
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23260724/
K-12 Schools
Identification, characterization, and mapping
of food waste and food waste generators in
Massachusetts
Massachusetts DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc.)
Massachusetts
DEP
2002
httDs://www.mass.sov/doc/studv-identification-
characterization-mapping-of-food-waste-generators-in-
massachusetts-2002/download
2014 Generator-Based Characterization of
Commercial Sector Disposal and Diversion in
California
CalRecycle (Cascadia
Consulting Group)
CalRecycle
2015
httDs://www2.calrecvcle.ca.sov/Publications/Details/1543
Food Waste Auditing at Three Florida Schools
Wilkie, A., Graunke,
R., & Cornejo, C.
Sustainability
2015
httD://www.mdoi.com/2071-1050/7/2/1370
Food Waste Estimation Guide
Recycling Works
Massachusetts
Recycling Works
Massachusetts
2013
https://recyclingworksma.com/food-waste-estimation-guide/
47
-------
SECTOR
TITLE
AUTHOR OR AGENCY
PUBLICATION
YEAR
WEBLINK
Food Waste in a School Nutrition Program
After Implementation of New Lunch Program
Guidelines
Byker, C., Farris, A.R.,
Marcenelle, M., Davis,
G.C., & Serrano, E.L.
Journal of
Nutrition
Education and
Behavior
2014
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24857599/
Identifying, Quantifying, and Mapping Food
Residuals from Connecticut Business and
Institutions
Connecticut DEP
(Draper/Lennon Inc.
and Atlantic
Geoscience Corp.)
Connecticut DEP
2001
https://portal.ct.gov/-
/media/DEEP/compost/ssomfile/ssomreportpdf.pdf?la=en
Estimating quantities and types of food waste
at the city level
NRDC
NRDC
2017
https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/food-waste-citv-level-
reoort.odf
Food Waste Warriors- A Deep Dive into Food
Waste in US Schools
WWF
WWF
2019
https://c402277.ssl.cfl.rackcdn.eom/publications/1271/files/o
risinal/FoodWasteWarriorR CS 121819.Ddf?1576689275
48
-------
9.3 DETAILED GENERATION AND MANAGEMENT ESTIMATES OF WASTED FOOD
Table 11 contains estimates of the amount of wasted food generated by each sector and category, and the amount managed by each management
pathway, per sector and category.
Table 11. Generation and Management Estimates of Wasted Food by Sector and Category (2019)
WASTED FOOD MANAGED BY SECTOR AND CATEGORY (TONS)
FOOD RETAIL
FOOD SERVICE
MANAGEMENT PATHWAY
MANUFACTURING/PROCESSING
RESIDENTIAL
SUPERMARKETS AND SUPERCENTERS
WHOLESALE
HOTELS
RESTAURANTS
SPORTS VENUES
HOSPITALS
NURSING HOMES
MILITARY INSTALLATIONS
OFFICE BUILDINGS
CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES
K-12 SCHOOLS
FOOD BANKS
INTERMEDIATE AMOUNT MANAGED1
TOTAL MANAGED BY EACH PATHWAY 2
Donation
2,205,990
"
3,700,112
1,633,888
12,269
188,110
407
3,063
4,263
642
41,991
4,362
6,405
12,807
-
7,814,310
7,341,283
Animal Feed
13,709,339
"
999,165
441,209
361
5,530
12
90
125
19
1,234
128
188
376
68,332
15,157,777
15,226,110
Bio-based
Materials/
Biochemical
64,737
.
194,019
85,674
90,808
1,392,231
3,014
22,668
31,552
4,755
310,780
32,284
47,403
94,790
26,008
2,374,717
2,400,725
Processing
Anaerobic
Digestion
17,055,531
6,430
210,253
92,843
10,243
157,041
340
2,557
3,559
536
35,056
3,642
5,347
10,692
-
17,594,070
17,594,070
Composting
583,305
977,975
1,318,098
582,043
15,462
237,050
513
3,860
5,372
810
52,916
5,497
8,071
16,140
80,957
3,807,112
3,888,068
Land Application
5,183,851
-
84,036
37,109
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
20,226
5,304,996
5,325,222
Controlled
Combustion
330,326
4,010,257
611,435
269,997
209,210
3,207,524
6,944
52,225
72,693
10,954
715,999
74,379
109,211
218,385
77,051
9,899,537
9,976,589
Landfill
917,630
17,532,332
1,881,325
830,752
857,724
13,150,297
28,471
214,113
298,027
44,911
2,935,472
304,940
447,746
895,341
200,453
40,339,079
40,539,532
49
-------
WASTED FOOD MANAGED BY SECTOR AND CATEGORY (TONS)
FOOD RETAIL
FOOD SERVICE
MANAGEMENT PATHWAY
MANUFACTURING/PROCESSING
RESIDENTIAL
SUPERMARKETS AND SUPERCENTERS
WHOLESALE
HOTELS
RESTAURANTS
SPORTS VENUES
HOSPITALS
NURSING HOMES
MILITARY INSTALLATIONS
OFFICE BUILDINGS
CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES
COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES
K-12 SCHOOLS
FOOD BANKS
INTERMEDIATE AMOUNT MANAGED1
TOTAL MANAGED BY EACH PATHWAY 2
Sewer/
Wastewater
-
3,975,352
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
3,975,352
3,975,352
T reatment
Total Food
Waste & Excess
40,050,707
26,502,346
8,998,443
3,973,516
1,196,076
18,337,784
39,702
298,576
415,591
62,627
4,093,447
425,232
624,371
1,248,532
473,027
106,266,950
106,266,950
Food
Note:
'Although an estimated 7,814,310 tons of excess food are donated to food banks, food banks are not able to distribute all the food that is donated to them due to spoilage, expiration, or other reasons. Therefore,
approximately 473,027 tons of the 7,814,310 tons ends up being managed as food waste via all
other management pathways, excluding sewer/wastewater treatment. In the Intermediate Amount Managed column,
the estimates of food waste do not yet distribute the 473,027 tons to those other pathways.
! Although an estimated 7,814,310 tons of excess food are donated to food banks, food banks are not able to distribute all the food that is donated to them due to spoilage, expiration, or other reasons. Therefore,
approximately 473,027 tons of the 7,814,310 tons ends up being managed as food waste via all other management pathways, excluding sewer/wastewater treatment. In the Total Managed by Each Pathway
column, the estimates of food waste generated by food banks are included in the management pathway estimates for each pathway.
50
-------
9.4 STATE COMPOSTING ESTIMATES
Table 12. State Composting Estimates (2019)
STATE1
REPORTED
QUANTITY (TONS)
SOURCE
Arizona
218,448
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. 2019 Arizona Municipal Recycling Data Report.
https://static.azdeq.gov/wqd/recy/2019_recycling_data.pdf
California
571,330
CalRecycle. (2021). State of Disposal and Recycling for Calendar Year 2019.
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/Publications/Download/1742
Colorado
170,732
Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment. (2020). 2019 Colorado Recycling Totals. Colorado Department of
Public Health & Environment, https://cdphe.colorado.gov/colorado-recycling-totals
Delaware
1,878
Delaware Solid Waste Authority. Annual Report 2019—Delaware. Delaware Solid Waste Authority.
https://dswa.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/ll/AR-2019-Use.pdf
District of Columbia
170.31
EPA State Data Measurement Program. 2019 SMP Data. EPA. Data available May 31, 2022.
Florida
69,443
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. 2019 Total Tons of MSW Materials Collected & Recycled in Florida by
Descending Population.
https://floridadep.gov/sites/default/files/2019_Total_Tons_of_MSW_Other_Paper_Food_Textiles_Misc.pdf
Indiana
19,011
EPA State Data Measurement Program. 2019 SMP Data. EPA. Data available May 31, 2022.
Kentucky
700
University of Kentucky. (2019). 2019 Annual Report (Material Management, p. 12). University of Kentucky.
https://www.ukv.edu/facilities/sites/www.ukv.edu.facilities/files/Recvcling/2019%20Annual%20Report Final.pdf
University of Louisville. (2022). Composting. University of Louisville.
https://louisville.edu/sustainability/operations/composting#:~:text=2018%3A%2044%20tons.,2021%3A%2036%20tons.
Louisiana
125
Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality. (2019). 2019 Annual Report- Louisiana (p. 38). Louisiana Department of
Environmental Quality. https://deq.louisiana.gov/assets/docs/Annual_Reports/LDEQAnnualReport2019.pdf
Maine
68,912
EPA State Data Measurement Program. 2019 SMP Data. EPA. Data available May 31, 2022
Maryland
87,078
EPA State Data Measurement Program. 2019 SMP Data. EPA. Data available May 31, 2022
Massachusetts
40,469
EPA State Data Measurement Program. 2019 SMP Data. EPA. Data available May 31, 2022.
Michigan
10,024
EPA State Data Measurement Program. 2019 SMP Data. EPA. Data available May 31, 2022.
Minnesota
61,080
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. (2021, April 29). Report on 2019 SCORE programs. Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency, https://www.pca.state.mn.us/waste/report-2019-score-programs
Mississippi
208
Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality. 2019 Status Report on Solid Waste Management Facilities and
Activities (p. 66). Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality, https://www.mdeq.ms.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2020/12/2019-Annual-Status-Report.pdf
Montana
1,418
EPA State Data Measurement Program. 2019 SMP Data. EPA. Data available May 31, 2022.
Nebraska
695
City of Lincoln, Nebraska. 2019 Solid Waste Grant Awarded- Nebraska. City of Lincoln, Nebraska.
https://lincoln.ne.gov/city/ltu/solid-waste/grant/awarded.htm
Nevada
11,153.16
Nevada Recycles. 2019 State Recycling Data- Nevada.
New York
56,465
The City of New York Department of Sanitation. 2019 Annual Report: New York City Curbside and Containerized
Municipal Refuse and Recycling Statistics (p. 1). The City of New York Department of Sanitation.
https://dsny.cityofnewyork.us/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/about_dsny-curbside-collections-FY2019.pdf
North Carolina
42,744
EPA State Data Measurement Program. 2019 SMP Data. EPA. Data available May 31, 2022.
51
-------
STATE1
REPORTED
QUANTITY (TONS)
SOURCE
Ohio
493,215
EPA State Data Measurement Program. 2019 SMP Data. EPA. Data available May 31, 2022.
Oregon
72,182
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality. (2021). 2019 Oregon Material Recovery and Waste Generation Rates
Report. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality.
https://www.oregon.gov/deq/recycling/Documents/recMrwgRatesReport2019.pdf
South Carolina
13,412.61
South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control. 2019 South Carolina Solid Waste Management Annual
Report (p. 102). South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control.
https://scdhec.gov/sites/default/files/Library/OR-1988.pdf#page=12
Vermont
36,127
Vermont Agency of Natural Resources. (2020). 2019 Diversion and Disposal Report- Vermont (p. 20). Vermont
Department of Environmental Concern. https://dec.vermont.gov/sites/dec/files/wmp/SolidWaste/Documents/2019-
Diversion-and-Disposal-Report.pdf
Virginia
1,189.16
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. (2020). 2020 Annual Solid Waste Report for CY2019 (p. 26). Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality.
https://www.deq.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/4832/637480306804470000#:~:text=Based%20on%20th
e%20facilities'%20reports,tons%20originated%20from%20other%20jurisdictions.
Washington
134,649
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. (2020). 2020 Annual Solid Waste Report for CY2019 (p. 26). Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality.
https://www.deq.virginia.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/4832/637480306804470000#:~:text=Based%20on%20th
e%20facilities'%20reports,tons%20originated%20from%20other%20jurisdictions.
Wisconsin
5,267
EPA State Data Measurement Program. 2019 SMP Data. EPA. Data available May 31, 2022.
Subtotal
2,998,745
Mixed MSW Composting2
306,019
Subtotal
3,304,764
Food Waste Composted by
Food
Manufacturers/Processors
583,305
Total
3,888,068
Note:
'Not all states are included in these composting estimates due to a lack of state composting data found.
2 Includes a small portion of non-food waste.
52
------- |