Transcript Illinois Commodity/Waste Generation and Characterization Study

Illinois Commodity/Waste Generation
and Characterization Study Update
Christopher Martel, P.E., BCEE, LEED AP
Study Sponsored By:
Study Completed By:
With Assistance From:
Catherine A. Cox
Introduction
• This study assists DCEO in fulfilling its
recycling and waste reduction related
missions:
– Supporting efforts to increase the quantity of
materials recycled or composted in Illinois.
– Supporting efforts to develop and expand
markets for recyclable materials.
– Supporting efforts to advance the selfsufficiency of the recycling industry in Illinois.
Study Tasks
• Waste Characterization – Estimate composition and
quantity of MSW originating and disposed within Illinois
• Waste Generation- Estimate quantity of MSW generated
within the state
• Waste Diversion – Calculate the quantity of MSW
diverted from landfills using the MSW generation and
MSW characterization results
• Planning Model - Develop and implement a excel based,
web published commodity/waste generation and
characterization (CWGC) planning model
Illinois Municipal Solid Waste
MSW Characterization Goals
• Determine the estimated recovery rates by material
types, and in gross aggregate, being recovered by
subtracting out the amount that will be estimated as
being disposed from generation data;
• Identify key opportunities for diversion, recovery
(including composting) or reuse of specific types of
disposed material categories;
• Identify the types and quantities of disposed materials
generated from residential, commercial and C&D sectors
that could be recoverable and the estimated value of
those materials based upon Midwest markets.
MSW Characterization Goals
• Determine the aggregate composition of Illinois’ MSW
disposed statewide according to the material categories;
• For the State as a whole, differentiate and compare MSW
composition of defined material categories disposed
from the Residential, Industrial/Commercial/Institutional
(ICI), and C&D generation sectors;
• For the State as a whole, differentiate and compare MSW
composition of defined material categories generated
and disposed from urban and rural areas by residential
and ICI sectors;
MSW Sampling Plan
MSW Sampling Locations
• 27 Sampling locations
• At least two per
IEPA region
• Distributed across
urban and rural areas
MSW Material Categories
• Materials were separated into 79 individual material categories
– Paper – Newsprint, High Grade Office Paper, Magazines/Catalogs, Uncoated
OCC/Kraft, Boxboard, Mixed Paper, Compostable Paper, Other Paper;
OCC
Mixed Paper
Magazines
MSW Material Categories
• Materials were separated into 79 individual material categories
– Beverage Containers - Milk And Juice Cartons/Boxes, Coated;
– Plastics - #1 Pet Bottles/Jars, #1 Other Pet Containers & Packaging, #2 HDPE
Bottles/Jars – Clear, #2 HDPE Bottles/Jars – Color, #2 Other HDPE Containers &
Packaging, #6 Expanded Polystyrene Packaging (EPS), #3-#7 Other – All, Other
Rigid Plastic Products, Grocery & Merchandise Bags, Trash Bags, Commercial &
Industrial Film, Other Film, Remainder/ Composite Plastic;
Other Film
#1 PET
#2 HDPE Clear
MSW Material Categories
• Materials were separated into 79 individual material categories
– Glass - Glass Bottles And Jars, Flat Glass, Other Glass;
Glass Bottles and Jars
MSW Material Categories
• Materials were separated into 79 individual material categories
– Metals - Aluminum Beverage Containers, Other Aluminum, HVACs Ducting,
Ferrous Containers (Tin Cans), Other Ferrous, Other Non-Ferrous, Other Metal;
Aluminum Cans
Ferrous Containers
(Tin Cans)
MSW Material Categories
• Materials were separated into 79 individual material categories
– Organics - Yard Waste (Compostable), Yard Waste (Woody), Food Scraps, Bottom
Fines And Dirt, Diapers, Other Organic;
Food Scraps
Yard Waste
(Compostable)
Yard Waste (woody)
MSW Material Categories
• Materials were separated into 79 individual material categories
– C&D - Clean Dimensional Lumber, Clean Engineered Wood, Wood Pallets,
Painted Wood, Treated Wood, Concrete, Reinforced Concrete, Asphalt Paving,
Rock & Other Aggregates, Bricks, Gypsum Board, Composition Shingles, Other
Roofing, Plastic C&D Materials, Ceramics/Porcelain, Other C&D
MSW Material Categories
• Materials were separated into 79 individual material categories
– Inorganics – Televisions, Computer Monitors, Computer Equipment/Peripherals,
Electronic Equipment, White Goods – Refrigerated, White Goods - Not
Refrigerated, Lead-Acid Batteries, Other Household Batteries, Tires, Household
Bulky Items, Fluorescent Lights/Ballasts;
Other Household
Batteries
Electronic Equipment
MSW Material Categories
• Materials were separated into 79 individual material categories
– HHW - Latex Paint, Oil Paint, Plant/Organism/Pest Control/Growth, Used
Oil/Filters, Other Automotive Fluids, Mercury-Containing Items, Sharps &
Infectious Waste, Ash, Sludge, & Other Industrial Processed Wastes, Sewage
Solids, Other HHW; And
– Textiles – Carpet, Carpet Padding, Clothing, Other Textiles.
Clothing
MSW Physical Characterization
• Sample weight: 200
to 300 pound samples
(ASTM D5231)
• Randomly selected
residential and ICI
loads
• Samples obtained
from random section
of load
MSW Physical Characterization
MSW Physical Characterization
MSW Visual Characterization
• Characterized
entire load
• Systematically
selected loads
• Estimated
volume and
converted to
weights
MSW Characterization Results
• 133 Residential samples
• 130 ICI samples
• 263 Total Residential and ICI samples
– 59,046 lbs sorted (29.5 tons)
– Average sample weight 224.5 lbs
• 161 C&D samples
– 918 tons characterized
– Average of 5.7 tons per load
Composition of Landfilled Residential MSW
Top Ten Material Categories in Landfilled Residential MSW
Category
Food Scraps
Yard Waste Compostable
Uncoated
OCC/Kraft
Compostable
Paper
Mixed Paper
- Recyclable
Recyclable
Glass Bottles
& Jars
Other
Organic
Diapers
Other Film
Painted
Wood
Waste
Composition
%
Cum. %
20.2%
20.2%
4.7%
24.9%
4.3%
29.2%
Beverage Household
Inorganics Containers Hazardous
5.1%
0.2%
Waste 0.5%
Glass 4.2%
Metal 4.3%
Textiles 6.9%
4.2%
Organics
33.1%
33.4%
C&D 9.3%
3.8%
37.2%
3.6%
40.8%
3.4%
44.2%
3.2%
3.0%
47.4%
50.4%
3.0%
53.3%
Plastic 15.4%
Paper 21.1%
Composition of Landfilled ICI MSW
Top Ten Material Categories in Landfilled ICI MSW
Waste
Composition
%
Cum. %
Food Scraps
16.4%
16.4%
Uncoated
OCC/Kraft
Wood Pallets
Compostable
Paper
Other Film
12.5%
28.9%
4.0%
3.6%
32.9%
36.5%
3.4%
39.9%
Bottom Fines &
Dirt
Other C&D
3.3%
43.2%
3.1%
46.3%
Commercial &
Industrial Film
Painted Wood
Other Rigid
Plastic Products
3.0%
49.3%
2.9%
2.5%
52.2%
54.7%
Category
Beverage
Containers
Inorganics
0.4%
3.4%
Glass 3.0%
Metal 4.1%
Household
Hazardous
Waste 0.6%
Organics
24.2%
Textiles 3.8%
C&D 19.4%
Paper 24.4%
Plastic 16.7%
Composition of Landfilled C&D MSW
Top Ten Material Categories in Landfilled C&D MSW
Category
Waste
Composition %
Cum. %
Bottom Fines & Dirt
Clean Dimensional Lumber
Composition Shingles
Clean Engineered Wood
Gypsum Board
Bricks
Painted Wood
Asphalt Paving
Concrete
Rock & Other Aggregates
19.6%
11.7%
8.5%
7.7%
7.0%
6.0%
5.5%
4.7%
4.7%
4.2%
19.6%
31.3%
39.8%
47.6%
54.6%
60.7%
66.2%
70.9%
75.6%
79.8%
Composition of Landfilled MSW
Top Ten Material Categories in Landfilled MSW
Category
Food Scraps
Uncoated
OCC/Kraft
Compostable
Paper
Other Film
Painted Wood
Bottom Fines &
Dirt
Mixed Paper Recyclable
Yard Waste Compostable
Recyclable Glass
Bottles & Jars
Other Rigid
Plastic Products
Waste
Composition
%
17.5%
8.8%
Inorganics
4.0%
Cum. %
17.5%
26.3%
3.7%
30.0%
3.1%
33.1%
3.0%
3.0%
36.1%
39.2%
2.7%
41.9%
Glass 3.4%
44.5%
2.6%
47.0%
2.5%
49.6%
Beverage
Containers
0.3%
Metal 4.1%
Textiles 4.9%
Organics
27.8%
C&D 16.9%
Paper 22.3%
Plastic 15.7%
2.6%
Household
Hazardous
Waste 0.5%
Comparison of Landfilled Residential MSW
MSW Composition Statewide
MSW Generation Task Goals
Determine the estimated generation of
Illinois’ MSW by generating source:
• Pounds per capita per day (PCD), differentiating
urban and rural values
• Illinois EPA’s seven regions in aggregate
• By county
• Statewide in aggregate
Comparison of findings to national data
MSW Generation Methodology
• 2012 national per capita generation rates
– Source: U.S. EPA national data Municipal Solid Waste
Generation, Recycling, and Disposal in the United States Tables
and Figures for 2012.
• Used Illinois specific economic indicators
– #2 HDPE Bottles/Jars used National average adjusted with
economic indicator - Illinois food store sales & adjusted with
sampling data
– Lead-acid batteries used Illinois motor vehicle registration and
population data to calculate generation rates
– Newsprint used County level market data; circulation and weight
of newspapers
– Recyclable Glass Bottles & Jars used Illinois market data and
national average
MSW Generation Composition
By Material Class
Beverage
Containers 0.2%
Inorganics 5.9%
Glass 2.9%
Household
Hazardous
Waste 0.9%
Organics 20.0%
Metal 4.1%
Textiles 3.8%
C&D 26.7%
Paper 24.8%
Plastic 10.7%
MSW Generation Composition
Top Ten MSW Generation Material Categories
Category
Uncoated OCC/Kraft
Food Scraps
Newsprint
Treated Wood
Other Rigid Plastic Products
Recyclable Glass Bottles & Jars
Compostable Paper
Gypsum Board
Yard Waste - Compostable
Other Textiles
Waste
Composition Tons
2,436,210
1,838,100
868,130
604,760
586,130
520,020
474,730
472,380
471,250
463,770
Cum. Tons
2,436,210
4,274,310
5,142,440
5,747,200
6,333,330
6,853,350
7,328,080
7,800,460
8,271,710
8,735,480
MSW Generation
by County and IEPA Region
Statewide MSW Generation = 19.3 M tons
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Region 1 = 1.09 M tons (5.6%)
Region 2 = 13.8 M tons (71.5%)
Region 3 = 1.03 M tons (5.3%)
Region 4 = 1.18 M tons (6.1%)
Region 5 = 0.73 M tons (3.8%)
Region 6 = 0.91 M tons (5.0%)
Region 7 = 0.52 M tons (2.7%)
MSW Generation by IEPA Region
Per Capita MSW Generation by IEPA Region
(pound per capita per day)
10.0
8.7
9.0
8.0
7.0
7.1
7.4
7.1
7.1
7.2
6.6
6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Region 5 Region 6 Region 7
MSW Diversion Results Compared to
National Averages
– Diversion = generated minus landfilled
– Statewide recycling rate is 37.3% (7.2 M tons)
– Materials below national recycling rate:
• All paper materials with OCC/Kraft (Illinois 57%
vs. National 91%)
• Most plastic materials, except HDPE, with
#1 PET Bottles/Jars (9% vs. 31%) and
* #2 HDPE Bottles/Jars (35% vs. 21%)
– Materials at national recycling rate
• High Grade Office Paper (51% vs. 53%)
• Yard Waste at national average (59% vs. 58%)
Illinois Municipal Solid Waste
19.3 M
7.2 M
2.5 M
12.1 M
2.2 M
9.9 M
0.4 M
2.1 M
Comparison 2008 and 2014 Studies
DCEO and IRA commissioned CDM Smith to
produce the 2008 ICWGC Study and the 2014
ICWGC Study Update to determine what
differences have occurred during this time period
for the estimated quantity and types of materials
generated, landfilled, and recovered in Illinois.
Every effort was made to repeat the 2008
ICWGC study as closely as possible using the
same methods and data sources.
Comparison 2008 and 2014 Studies
Landfilled Illinois MSW Composition
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Paper
2008
Beverage Plastic
Containers
Glass
Metal
Organics Inorganics Textiles
HHW
C&D
2014
Arrows indicate statistically significant change via 90% confidence interval
Comparison 2008 and 2014 Studies
Illinois MSW Landfilled Commodity Material
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Newsprint
2008
High Grade Uncoated
Office Paper OCC/Kraft
Boxboard
#1 PET
#2 HDPE
#2 HDPE
Aluminum Yard Waste - Food Scraps
Bottles/Jars Bottles/Jars - Bottles/Jars - Beverage Compostable
Clear
Color
Containers
2014
Arrows indicate statistically significant change via 90% confidence interval
Comparison 2008 and 2014 Studies
Illinois C&D Landfilled Waste
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Clean
Composition
Clean
Dimensional Shingles Engineered
Lumber
Wood
2008
Gypsum
Board
Bricks
Painted
Wood
Asphalt
Paving
Concrete
Rock &
Other
Aggregates
2014
Arrows indicate statistically significant change via 90% confidence interval
Comparison 2008 and 2014 Studies
Statewide MSW Generation
6,000
Thousands tons
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
Paper
Beverage Plastic
Containers
Glass
Metal
2008
Organics Inorganics Textiles
2014
HHW
C&D
Comparison 2008 and 2014 Studies
IEPA Region MSW Generation
9
8
pounds/person/day
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Region 1
Region 2
Region 3
Region 4
2008 Total MSW (pounds/person/day)
Region 5
Region 6
Region 7
2014Total MSW (pounds/person/day)
Illinois
Comparison 2008 and 2014 Studies
Illinois Recovery/Diversion Rates
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Paper
Beverage
Containers
Plastic
Glass
Metal
2008
Organics Inorganics
2014
Textiles
HHW
C&D
Comparison 2008 and 2014 Studies
Illinois Recovery/Diversion of
Commodity Materials
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Newsprint
High Grade
Office Paper
Uncoated
OCC/Kraft
Boxboard
#1 PET
#2 HDPE
#2 HDPE
Aluminum Yard Waste - Food Scraps
Bottles/Jars Bottles/Jars - Bottles/Jars - Beverage Compostable
Clear
Color
Containers
2008
2014
Acknowledgements
Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic
Opportunity, Division of Recycling and Waste Reduction
Mr. David Smith, Grant Manager
Mr. David Ross, Recycling Staff
Illinois Recycling Association
Ms. Wynne Coplea, President
Mr. Rod Fletcher, Consultant to IRA
Acknowledgements
The following Republic Services staff and facilities:
The staff at Northlake Transfer, Roxana Landfill, Groen Transfer Station,
Lee County Landfill, LandComp Landfill, Liberty Waste Services, Sangamon
Valley Landfill, Livingston Landfill, Southern Illinois Regional Landfill, ARC
Disposal & Recycling, Calumet Transfer, Shred-All Recycling Systems Transfer
Station, Momence & Apollo Transfer Station, Sumner Landfill, Urbana
Transfer Station, ADS/McLean County Landfill #2, Planet Recovery Transfer
Station; lead by Steve Smith, Brian Holcomb, Sergio Ferness, Daniel Zurek,
Rich Galloway, Alan Cox, Bill Janes, Jim Allen, Ken Scott, Brian Hughes, Nick
Bauer, Gary Blue, Dave Vasbinder, Anthony Berg, Roger Cochran, Nina
Anthony, Roy Whittinghill, Dave Farley, and Shawn Underwood.
Acknowledgements
The staff and the following facilities:
SWANCC - Steve Schilling and Dave Van Vooren
Will County Land Use Department - Marta Keane
Chicago Streets and Sanitation - Chris Sauve and staff at Medill Transfer Station
Homewood Disposal Service - Jon Schroeder and staff
Winnebago Landfill - Tom Hilbert, Bob Lichty, Jeff Theien, Troy Keip and staff
Groot - Frank Fulkerts and staff at SWANCC Transfer Station
PDC - Ronald Welk and staff at Hickory Ridge Landfill
Knox County Landfill #3 - Jerry Renolds and staff
The following Waste Management staff and facilities:
Cottonwood Hills Landfill, Countryside Landfill Inc., Peoria City/County
Landfill #2, Prairie View Recycling and Disposal Facility; lead by
Chris Rubak, Mike Hey, Mike Wiersema, Lisa Disbrow, Doug Hopkins,
Joe Farris, Kelvin Kirkman, Joe Durako, Bill Rainer and facility staff.
Questions
Study Sponsored By:
Study Completed By:
With Assistance From: