© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. CHAPTER 21 Municipal Solid Waste: Disposal and Recovery

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. An introduction to municipal solid waste Danehy Park is in North Cambridge, Massachusetts Its 50 acres hosts thousands of people A red light in the bathroom warns if methane has built up The park is built on an old landfill that was once a blight on the neighborhood In the 1970s and 1980s, closing old landfills created a “solid waste crisis” that turned out to be temporary Many have been converted to parks, golf courses, and nature preserves We are running out of space to put all of our garbage

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. From landfills to playing fields

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Solid wastes: landfills and combustions Municipal solid waste (MSW): total of all materials (trash, refuse, garbage) thrown away from homes and small businesses It is collected by local governments It is different from hazardous waste and nonhazardous industrial waste Nonhazardous industrial waste: generated by industries Demolition and construction wastes, agricultural and mining wastes, sewage sludge, industrial wastes States, not the EPA, oversee these wastes

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Disposal of municipal solid waste The amount of MSW generated in the U.S. is increasing More people, changing lifestyles, excessive packaging In 1960, the average MSW was 2.7 lbs/person/day In 2007: 4.6 lbs/person/day In 2007, the U.S. generated enough garbage to fill 96,000 garbage trucks/day We generate huge amounts of MSW and it is harder to dispose of in an environmentally sound and healthy way MSW varies depending on the generator, neighborhood, and time of year

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. U.S. MSW composition

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Whose job? Many local governments are responsible for collecting and disposing of MSW They own trucks and hire workers Or contract with a private firm Who pays for the cost of waste pickup? Taxes Pay-as-you-throw: charges by the amount of trash Collectors bill households State and federal regulations begin to apply at disposal

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Past sins Until the 1960s MSW was burned and buried in dumps Smoldering dumps smelled and attracted flies and rats Incineration (combustion facilities): burn waste completely May cause air pollution Open dumps and incinerators were phased out Public pressure and air pollution laws Replaced by landfills In the last 10 years, landfills and combustion have declined Recycling has increased Patterns of disposal differ in countries

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. U.S. MSW disposal

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Landfills Landfill: waste is put on or in the ground and covered with earth Minimizing air pollution and vermin But managers did not understand ecology, the water cycle, or products of decomposition They did not have regulations to guide them So landfills were put on any cheap land outside of town Natural gullies, abandoned quarries, wetlands, old dumps

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. New Orleans dump

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Problems of landfills: leachate and groundwater pollution Leaching: chemicals dissolve in and are transported by water Leachate: water with various pollutants A “witches brew” of pollutants Organic matter, heavy metals, chemicals Can enter groundwater aquifers All states have, or will have, landfills contaminating groundwater Florida has 145 sites on the Superfund list (sites where groundwater contamination threatens human health)

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Problems of landfills: methane Buried wastes undergo anaerobic decomposition Producing biogas (methane, CO 2 and hydrogen) Biogas is highly flammable Seeping horizontally through soil, it can enter homes and cause explosions Seeping to the surface, it kills vegetation Biogas can be captured, purified, and used as fuel In 2008, commercial landfill gas produced electricity and gas for 1.4 million homes Reducing greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuel use

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Westminster landfill

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Problems of landfills: incomplete decomposition Plastics in MSW resist decomposition Petroleum-based polymers resist microbial digestion Biodegradable plastic polymers have been developed Using cornstarch, cellulose, lactic acid, soybeans They are more expensive They are used by organic manufacturing companies Even biodegradable materials degrade very slowly Newspapers buried 30 years ago are still readable Decomposition requires water But water produces toxic leachates

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Problems of landfills: settling Waste settles as it compacts and decomposes Buildings have never been put on landfills Where landfills have been converted to playgrounds and golf courses, shallow depressions or deep holes are created Monitoring the facility and using fill to restore a level surface solve the problem

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Improving landfills The EPA upgraded siting and construction requirements New landfills are sited on high, stable ground above the water table, away from airports Water drains into a leachate-collection system Tile, plastic liners, and compacted soil collect leachate The fill is built up in the shape of a pyramid and capped with earthen material and soil and reseeded The site is surrounded by groundwater monitors Abandoned landfills can become recreational facilities Attractive golf courses and wildlife preserves

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Features of a modern landfill

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Siting new landfills Between 1988 and 2007, landfills decreased from 8,000 to 1,754 The EPA does not think capacity is a problem But people don’t want landfills near them It is hard to find areas to build new landfills Any potential site is met with protests and lawsuits LULU (locally unwanted land use); NIMBY (not in my backyard); NIMTOO (not in my term of office) BANANA (build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything)

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Outsourcing Undesirable consequences of the siting problem Drives up costs of waste disposal Inefficient and objectionable transfer to private landfills Transfer of waste may occur across state or national lines Resentment and opposition from citizens 11 U.S. states export > 1 million tons/year (#1: New York) 13 states import > 1 million tons/year (#1: Pennsylvania) Desirable consequences of siting problems: it encourages recycling and stimulates combustion of MSW

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Advantages of combustion 89 U.S. facilities burn 32 million tons/year of MSW A waste reduction process, not disposal Ash must still be disposed of Combustion reduces weight of trash by 70% and volume by 90% Fly ash contains most of the toxic substances It is landfilled Bottom ash: is used as fill in construction or roadbeds Converted to concrete

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. More advantages of combustion No changes are needed in collection or people’s behavior Two-thirds of combustion facilities are waste-to- energy (WTE) Untreated MSW releases 35% as much energy as coal when burned Producing electricity for 2.3 million homes Wasted energy going to landfills equals 9.4 billion gallons of diesel oil/year Many facilities add resource recovery Separating and recycling materials before and after burning

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Drawbacks of combustion Air pollution: has decreased through strict regulations Odor pollution: plants are isolated from residential areas Facilities are expensive to build Siting: facilities are located in industrial areas Toxic ash must be disposed of in secure landfills The facility must have a continuous supply of MSW Agreements with municipalities decreases flexibility in waste management options The process wastes energy and materials Combine burning with recycling and recovery

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. An operating facility A facility serving 1 million gets 3,000 tons of MSW/day Waste comes in by rail and truck Communities pay $65/ton tipping fees Waste processing is efficient: 80% is burned for energy 12% is recovered; 8% is landfilled If 1 million tons of MSW are processed 40,000 tons of metals are recycled Electricity for 65,000 homes is generated Opponents cite air pollution, traffic, and property values as concerns against WTE facilities

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. The WTE process Incoming waste is inspected and recyclables are removed Shredders reduce waste particles to 6 inches or less Magnets remove metals for recycling Waste is blown into boilers for burning Water circulating through the boilers produces steam for electricity Metals are separated from bottom ash Combustion gases are treated to reduce emissions Fly ash and bottom ash are taken to landfills

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Waste-to-energy combustion facility

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Costs of municipal solid-waste disposal Costs of disposing of MSW are increasing Design features of landfills Expenses in acquiring sites and transportation Tipping fees average $42/ton (but New York City’s is $263/ton—$1 billion/year!) One consequence: illegal dumping Some towns charge $5/bag for MSW, $1/tire, etc. Wastes are appearing in many areas Buildings put padlocks on dumpsters Many states track down midnight dumpers

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Better solutions: source reduction Source reduction: reducing waste at its source The best solution for domestic wastes Designing, manufacturing, purchasing, or using materials to reduce the amount/toxicity of trash U.S. waste has leveled off at 4.5 lbs/person Due to lifestyle changes Measured by measuring consumer spending, which reflects goods and products that become trash In 2000, 55 million tons did not go into the waste stream

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Examples Reducing the weight of items Steel cans are 60% lighter than they used to be Reducing paper waste via electronic communication, data transfer, the Internet Reusing durable goods: reselling items eBay, Craigslist, Freecycle Network Designing products to last longer and be easier to repair Staying off of bulk mailing lists Composting yard wastes

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Waste reduction by reuse

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. The recycling solution More than 75% of MSW is recyclable Primary recycling: the waste is recycled into the same material Recycling newspapers into newspapers Secondary recycling: waste is made into different products that may or may not be recyclable Recycling newspapers into cardboard

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Benefits of recycling Recycling saves energy and resources One ton of recycled steel saves 2,500 pounds of iron ore, 1,000 lbs of coal, 5,400 BTUs of energy Recycling decreases pollution Making recycled paper uses 64% less energy, creates 74% less air, and 35% less pollution A recycling program that processes 1 ton of waste eliminates 620 lbs of CO 2, 30 lbs of methane, 5 lbs of CO, 2.5 lbs of particulates

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. What gets recycled? Paper (47%): paper, cardboard, insulation, or is composted Glass (28%): new containers, fiberglass or used in highway construction (glassphalt) Plastic (12%): carpet, clothes, irrigation drainage tiles, building materials, sheet plastic Metals: recycling aluminum (39%) saves 90% of the energy to make cans from ore Saves energy, creates jobs, reduces the trade deficit Yard wastes (64%) are composted

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Deck made from Trex

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Other items that are recycled Textiles (17%): strengthen recycled paper products Old tires (35%): incorporated into highway asphalt Over 1 million tires/year are burned in combustion plants People recycle out of environmental and economic motivations The Global Recycling Network is an information exchange promoting recycling and ecofriendly products

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Municipal recycling Recycling is the most direct and obvious way to become involved in environmental issues Almost every state has recycling goals, with varying degrees of success 33.4% of MSW was recycled in 2007 There is great diversity in recycling programs Recycling centers, curbside recycling, incentives, etc.

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. State recycling rates

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. MSW recycling in the U.S.

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Successful recycling programs Have a strong incentive to recycle PAYT charges, but no charges for recycling Have mandatory regulations, with warnings or sanctions for violators Offer curbside residential recycling 60% of people in the U.S. have curbside programs Have drop-off sites for large items (e.g., sofas) Have ambitious, yet clear and feasible, recycling goals Involve local industries Have an experienced, committed recycling coordinator

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Curbside recycling

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Economics of recycling Cities have different recycling rates New York City, 16%; San Francisco, 70% Recycling costs are often higher than alternatives Markets fluctuate wildly; low tipping fees Recycling critics say that recycling must pay for itself Environmental assessments should compare energy costs of recycling with costs of landfill or combustion Life cycle analysis: comparing energy costs of making products from recycled goods vs. from scratch

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Recycling has taken a hit The 2008–2009 recession caused demand for recyclable products to plummet Berkeley, California received $200/ton for recyclables in 2008, but it got $35/ton in 2009 But support for recycling is strong Two-thirds of households will participate in curbside recycling Even more recycle if a PAYT program exists or participants are rewarded Dover, New Hampshire’s MSW went from 6 lbs/person (1991) to 2.3 lbs/person (1997)

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Paper recycling Newspapers: the most important item that is recycled 78% of newspaper is recycled What is meant by “recycled paper”? Recycled paper: routinely recovered and rerouted back into processing Postconsumer recycled paper is what’s important It is almost impossible to tell recycled from virgin paper The market is a critical factor in recycled paper Is there a demand?

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. The market for recycled paper The market for recycled paper fluctuates widely During the late 1980s, municipalities had to pay to get rid of paper In 1995, at $160/ton, paper was being stolen! In 1996, the market collapsed Cities had to pay to have paper hauled away But it is still less expensive than paying tipping fees There is a lively international trade in used paper Forest-poor countries buy wastepaper

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Wastepaper exports

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Glass recycling and bottle laws Most MSW glass: containers for beverages The U.S. drinks 28 billion gallons/year Most drinks come in single-serve containers that are thrown away Glass = 5.3% of MSW, but 50% of nonburnable MSW Mining and manufacturing create pollution Hidden problems: litter, injuries, flat tires, etc. Bottle laws: require a deposit on all beverage containers Retailers must accept used containers and pass them on for reuse or recycling

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Bottle laws Are fiercely opposed by beverage and container industries Cite lost jobs and higher costs of beverages Well-financed lobbying has defeated bottle laws 11 states have adopted bottle laws Jobs are gained and costs have not risen A high percentage of bottles is returned There is a marked reduction in litter A national bottling law has been unsuccessful It would increase recycling It would employ tens of thousands

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Plastics recovery Plastics have a bad reputation They have a rapid throughput (packaging, diapers, etc.) The are conspicuous in MSW and litter They do not decompose in landfills Bottled water: the number one “new” drink 8.9 billion gallons were sold in the U.S. in 2007 Only two states with bottle laws include bottled water People pay 10,000 times more than for tap water Only 1 in 6 bottles is recycled But there is a real market demand for plastic

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. PETE and HDPE Numbers and letters on the bottom of plastic bottles tell the type of plastic polymer in the bottle PETE (polyethylene terephthalate): code 1 Recycled into carpets, jackets, film, strapping, new PETE bottles HDPE (high-density polyethylene): code 2 Recycled into irrigation drainage tiles, sheet plastic, recycling bins Recycling plastic makes economic and environmental sense

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Plastic bags Plastic bags are everywhere: hanging from trees, blowing along highways, clogging sewers, in oceans Killing thousands of marine animals and turtles yearly Each year, the U.S. uses 100 billion (world: 1 trillion!) Hard to recycle and almost indestructible China has banned ultrathin bags San Francisco banned plastic bags in 2007 The plastic industry is fighting back with lawsuits Use cloth, paper bags, or thicker plastic bags

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Regional recycling options As landfills close and MSW is transferred to other places, transfer stations that transfer wastes to larger vehicles are set up Materials recovery facilities (MRFs, “murfs”) Converted transfer stations 567 MRFs in the U.S. handle 91,000 tons/day After recyclables are collected by curbside collection or collecting stations, MSW is trucked to the MRF Workers inspect and sort the MSW to prepare it for the recyclable-goods market Glass, cans, paper, plastic

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Materials recovery facility

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. MRFs MRF’s advantages: economies of scale It produces a high-quality end product for recyclable materials market People know where to bring their wastes Some MRFs use high technology to sort waste Magnets, optical sensors, air sorters Mixed waste processing facilities: less common Waste is sorted for recovery of recyclables before being landfilled or combusted The U.S. has 34 facilities handling 43,000 tons/day

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Composting mixed waste and yard trimmings Some facilities compost MSW after removing large items and metals Co-composting: mixing treated sludge with MSW provides bacteria and nutrients Facilities are plagued with flies and fire They may also be combined with a MRF Yard-trimmings composting programs are more common 3,500 U.S. programs handle 57,000 tons/day

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Public policy: federal legislation and waste management Local governments used to manage all MSW Federal and state agencies now regulate, encourage, and facilitate waste management Solid Waste Disposal Act (1965): gave the Bureau of Solid Waste Management jurisdiction over MSW Financial and technical, not regulatory Resource and Recovery Act (1970): gave the EPA jurisdiction over waste management Directs attention to recycling programs Encouraged states to develop management programs

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. More federal legislation Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA; 1976) A regulatory (command-and-control) approach The EPA can close dumps and set landfill regulations Combustion facilities were covered by air pollution and hazardous-waste regulations States must develop comprehensive management plans The Superfund Act (1980): addresses abandoned landfills Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (1984): the EPA sets criteria for hazardous wastes Closer monitoring of all landfill and combustion criteria

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Integrated waste management It is not necessary to use one method of handling MSW Source reduction, waste-to-energy, combustion, recycling, MRFs, landfills, composting all have roles Integrated waste management uses several processes Waste reduction: the U.S. produces the most waste We are a “throwaway society” True management of MSW begins at home WasteWise: an EPA-sponsored program that partners with local governments, schools, corporations Partners design their own waste-reduction programs

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. The throwaway society

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. PAYT and EPR PAYT: people pay curbside charges for unsorted MSW Instead of paying taxes for collection and disposal Used by 25% of the U.S. population 25%–45% waste reduction 32%–59% increase in recycling The EPA is a facilitator, not regulator EPR: extended product responsibility Companies take back used items and manufacture more durable goods The EPA provides information

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Pay-as-you-throw trash pickup

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Waste disposal issues There will always be MSW Landfilling will decrease and more MSW will go to WTE combustion facilities and recycling Policy makers have opted for short-term solutions with low political costs Resulting in long-distance hauling of MSW Areas required to handle their own trash will find suitable landfill sites and use the best technologies People don’t want trash from other areas It will take an act of Congress to address this problem

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Just say no! The Solid Waste Interstate Transportation Act (2009) Local and state governments could limit or prohibit transportation of out-of-state wastes to landfills It is unfair that states that are working hard on managing their wastes must receive unrestricted wastes from other states Another policy goal: encourage more MSW composting The best way to handle nonrecyclable mixed waste

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Recycling and reuse Recycling is the wave of the future Making more durable goods is overlooked and underutilized Banning the disposal of recyclables in landfills and at combustion facilities makes sense Massachusetts bans yard wastes, metals, glass, paper, and plastics A national bottle law would be a giant step forward Closing the “recycling loop” would encourage recycling

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Closing the recycling loop Set minimum postconsumer levels of recycled content for newsprint and glass containers Require purchases of certain goods that include recycled products Even if they are more expensive Require that all packaging be reusable or made of recycled materials Tax credits or incentives encourage the use of recycled or recyclable materials in manufacturing Help develop recycling markets

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. CHAPTER 21 Municipal Solid Waste: Disposal and Recovery Active Lecture Questions

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. True or False: Municipal solid waste (MSW) is the same as hazardous waste. a.True b.False Review Question-1

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. True or False: Municipal solid waste (MSW) is the same as hazardous waste. a.True b.False Review Question-1 Answer

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. “Gas wells” in landfills tap into the ______ naturally produced within the landfill by the decomposition process. a.carbon dioxide b.oxygen c.methane d. water vapor Review Question-2

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. “Gas wells” in landfills tap into the ______ naturally produced within the landfill by the decomposition process. a.carbon dioxide b.oxygen c.methane d. water vapor Review Question-2 Answer

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All of the following are drawbacks of combustion except a.air pollution. b.reduction of garbage volume. c.combustion facilities are expensive. d.combustion ash must be disposed of as hazardous waste. Review Question-3

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. All of the following are drawbacks of combustion except a.air pollution. b.reduction of garbage volume. c.combustion facilities are expensive. d.combustion ash must be disposed of as hazardous waste. Review Question-3 Answer

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. The two recyclable plastics in most common use are ______ (code 2) and ______ (code 1). a.HDPE; PETE b.HDL; LDL c.MSW; MRF d.LDL; MSW Review Question-4

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. The two recyclable plastics in most common use are ______ (code 2) and ______ (code 1). a.HDPE; PETE b.HDL; LDL c.MSW; MRF d.LDL; MSW Review Question-4 Answer

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Integrated waste management calls for having the following processes in operation: a.recycling and composting. b.materials recovery facilities. c.landfills. d.all of the above. Review Question-5

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Integrated waste management calls for having the following processes in operation: a.recycling and composting. b.materials recovery facilities. c.landfills. d.all of the above. Review Question-5 Answer

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. According to Fig. 21-3, most of the municipal solid waste in the United States is disposed by a. recycling. b. composting. c. burying in landfills. d. burning. Interpreting Graphs and Data-1

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. According to Fig. 21-3, most of the municipal solid waste in the United States is disposed by a. recycling. b. composting. c. burying in landfills. d. burning. Interpreting Graphs and Data-1 Answer

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. According to Fig , in what year did MSW recycling begin to increase dramatically? a b c d Interpreting Graphs and Data-2

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. According to Fig , in what year did MSW recycling begin to increase dramatically? a b c.2000 d Interpreting Graphs and Data-2 Answer

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. The accumulation of televisions, computers, DVD players, cell phones, and the like has contributed to a new kind of waste called a. techno-waste. b. EZ-waste. c. MSW. d. e-waste. Thinking Environmentally-1

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. The accumulation of televisions, computers, DVD players, cell phones, and the like has contributed to a new kind of waste called a. techno-waste. b. EZ-waste. c. MSW. d. e-waste. Thinking Environmentally-1 Answer

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. The type of material that contributes most to the municipal solid waste in the United States is a. wood. b. food waste. c. plastics. d. paper. Thinking Environmentally-2

© 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. The type of material that contributes most to the municipal solid waste in the United States is a. wood. b. food waste. c. plastics. d. paper. Thinking Environmentally-2 Answer