Garbology: Our Dirty Love Affair With Trash (31 page)

Read Garbology: Our Dirty Love Affair With Trash Online

Authors: Edward Humes

Tags: #Travel, #General, #Technology & Engineering, #Environmental, #Waste Management, #Social Science, #Sociology

BOOK: Garbology: Our Dirty Love Affair With Trash
12.7Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
ENDNOTES

INTRODUCTION

1.
    This calculation is derived from the most recent and most accurate data on America’s annual municipal waste generation, the biannual study by Columbia University and the journal
BioCycle
, which put the nation’s trash total at 389.5 million tons in 2008. The population of the country was put at 301 million that year by the U.S. Census, which yields a daily waste generation amount of 7.1 pounds per day.
2.
    “Plastic Water Bottle-Makers Sued by California over Green Claims,”
Los Angeles Times
, October 27, 2011.
3.
    “Products, Packaging and US Greenhouse Gas Emissions,” Joshuah Stolaroff, Product Policy Institute, September 2009.
4.
    “The State of Garbage in America,” a joint study by
BioCycle
and the Earth Engineering Center of Columbia University, by Rob van Haaren, Nickolas Themelis and Nora Goldstein, published in
BioCycle
, October 2010. Data is from the year 2008. The study is published biannually.
5.
    This calculation assumes a U.S. adult population of 230 million and an average weight of 178 pounds (195 pounds for men and 165 pounds for women), as reported by the National Center for Health Statistics in “U.S. Body Measurements, 2009.”
6.
    The
BioCycle
/Columbia University biannual survey of municipal solid waste sent to landfills, recycling, compost and waste-to-energy facilities draws on actual state-by-state data from the nation’s municipal waste systems and is the most accurate actual count of America’s trash. The better-known annual MSW report from the EPA does not use actual trash disposal data, but instead relies on a materials flow analysis and data from manufacturers to estimate the amount of products and materials consumed by Americans and how long those products and materials are likely to last. From these assumptions, combined with waste characteristic sampling studies for non-manufactured waste, the EPA estimates calculate how much stuff ought to be thrown out every year. Actual trash data is not used by the EPA. This method has come under fire for its chronic tendency to underestimate total trash and landfill loads, while overestimating the proportion that gets recycled.
7.
    Ibid.
8.
    Garbage In, Garbage Out: A Note on the Numbers
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s annual report, “Municipal Solid Waste in the United States,” is widely considered the most authoritative source on waste and trash in the country, a garbage ground zero for journalists, researchers and elected officials on how much trash we make, burn, bury and recycle, and how much of it is plastic, paper, metal, food scraps, or yard trimmings. Overall, according to the EPA, the country’s annual “waste stream” broke down in 2008 this way: 54 percent of the municipal waste (135.6 million tons) went to landfills, a third (84 million tons) was recycled or composted, and the remaining 12.6 percent (31.6 million tons) was burned in waste-to-energy generating plants. The grand total of municipal waste reported: 251 million tons. At that number, America’s daily trash footprint would be 4.5 pounds a person. But that’s more than 2.5 pounds a day less per American than the correct amount, 7.1 pounds, and more than 130 million tons light for the whole country’s yearly tally.
So how can that be? Where did the EPA go so badly wrong with a report it’s been producing for decades?
Most might guess coming up with trash numbers would involve a lot of weighing of the streams of trash headed to landfills. This would be a relatively straightforward task—laborious, but straightforward. Every municipal waste landfill in America has scales. They weigh garbage trucks going in full, they weigh them going out empty, and by calculating the difference, they determine how much trash gets dumped—each load, every load, every day of the week. It’s how dump operators plan for the future, budget their resources and manpower, and, not incidentally, it’s how they make money: They charge by the ton. Recycling, composting and waste-to-energy operations work in an analogous way to produce a statistical snapshot of our waste. Many states compile reports summarizing this data in order to plan and evaluate their own conservation and recycling efforts.
But the EPA does not use this information. It does not weigh trash in the real world—not a single piece of it—nor does it contact the nation’s landfills to get that information. Instead, the EPA relies on “materials flow methodology.” In plain English, this means the EPA calculates trash amounts based not on objective weights and measures, but on data supplied by manufacturers on how much stuff they sell (for instance, the number of plastic bags made and sold in the U.S. every year), how long that stuff is likely to last before becoming trash, and how much of it gets recycled, composted or burned. These are industry estimates reported through a national honor system, checked by equations, not scales. Waste sampling studies are then used to estimate national figures for yard trimmings, food scraps and other non-manufactured municipal waste. Sometimes press reports on garbage are used to flesh out the data further. Together, this amalgam of information is used to produce an estimate of the total waste stream—a figure lying at the end of a long chain of promises, assumptions and theory.
This method dates back thirty years, to an era when there were ten times the number of landfills and thousands of illegal dumps in the U.S., and the industry was largely unregulated and uncharted. Using the indirect method of materials flow analysis made sense then—it was the best anyone could do. But there are far fewer landfills now, a web of state reporting requirements have been placed on them, and the ability to do a direct, more accurate count of waste, rather than rely on indirect life-cycle calculations, has existed for more than a decade.
The flaws in the EPA’s approach are easily detected. The EPA estimates that a total of 135 million tons of trash were buried in landfills in 2008. The problem: A single landfill operator, Waste Management, Inc., reports burying almost the same amount of trash that year, 125 million tons, all on its own. Waste Management may be the biggest trash company in the world, but they don’t own America’s entire landfill business—they control only a third of America’s active landfill space. There are more than a hundred other major waste-management companies in the country, not to mention the many publicly owned and operated landfills, and their combined landfill business easily exceeds Waste Management’s. One simple check reveals that the EPA numbers are badly off-kilter.
It fell to a partnership between Columbia University’s Earth Engineering Center and a respected, if obscure, trade journal,
BioCycle
, to do the actual trash counting that the feds had declined to do. This project produces numbers from the real world of trash that reveal the serious, even scandalous, gap between the EPA stats and reality—the biggest, dirtiest and poorest-kept secret in the trash biz.
How bad is the disparity? Americans are sending more than twice as much garbage to municipal landfills as the EPA figures suggest. Adding insult to injury, the EPA also incorrectly inflates the proportion of trash recycled—we’re not doing nearly as well as we thought. The amount recycled and composted isn’t a third of all our trash, as the EPA reported for the last several years. It’s barely a quarter of it. In 2011, the EPA leadership finally admitted there was a problem and publicly solicited advice for improving its annual garbage survey.
Not all EPA solid waste statistics are flawed, however. While the materials flow methods used to calculate the amount of trash aren’t working well, the methods used to calculate the
composition
of our trash continue to be useful. These calculations are informed in part by studies of real-world samples of typical Americans’ trash—how much of it is plastic, metal, paper, food scraps and so on. These figures are expressed in the EPA annual reports as percentages. Because extrapolating national estimates from real-world samples is a tried-and-true, scientifically valid technique, the EPA’s percentage estimates on the composition of trash are used throughout this book as the best available data. However, in passages or lists in which those percentages are used to derive quantities of a certain type of trash, such as reporting that 5.4 million tons of rugs and carpets are sent to landfills each year, this quantity is calculated by applying the EPA’s composition percentages to the Columbia/
BioCycle
total waste figures.
9.
    Even the Pentagon sources its silicon from the same China that, as recently as 1999, was banned from importing Apple Inc.’s most powerful personal computer because it might be used in weapons systems. (Of course, ten years later, most Apple products, like every other U.S.-branded computer, tablet and smart phone, were being built in Chinese factories.)

10.
  
Journal of Commerce
.

CHAPTER 1

1.
    “The State of Garbage in America,”
BioCycle
, October 2010.
2.
    “Mission 5000,” EPA, 1972.
3.
    The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, better known as the Superfund, is a federal program for cleaning up hazardous waste sites. It was created in response to the severe pollution and health threats posed by the Love Canal disaster and other, similar crises. At the end of 2010, there were 1,280 sites slated for cleanup on the Superfund priority list.
4.
    According to Seagull Control Systems, Inc., which markets such seagull barriers. The U.S. Department of Agriculture also recommends monofilament lines as the most effective safeguard against landfill-marauding gulls.

CHAPTER 2

1.
    From
Municipal Journal
, Volume XLV, No. 26, July–December 1918; and “Health Survey of New Haven: A Report Presented to the Civic Federation of New Haven by Charles-Edward Amory Winslow, James Gowan Greenway and David Greenberg of Yale University,” Yale University Press, 1917.

CHAPTER 3

1.
    “Consumption of Sugar Drinks in the United States, 2005–2008,” National Center for Health Statistics, August 2011.

CHAPTER 4

1.
    “Mission 5000,” EPA, 1972.

CHAPTER 10

1.
    Estimates of plastic bag usage by the average American vary. Industry estimates put the figure at five hundred disposable bags per capita, according to American Plastics Manufacturing, Inc. Andy Keller of ChicoBag considers this to be a very conservative figure, and has published calculations based on manufacturing and EPA data that peg annual plastic bag disposal for 2009 at 739 bags per person. This figure may also be too low, as the EPA consistently underestimates the amount of trash generated by Americans.
2.
    Keller’s calculation is based on the annual consumption of plastic grocery bags in the U.S. reported by the International Trade Commission in 2009—102 billion—multiplied by his assumed average bag length of 1 foot, then divided by the earth’s circumference, which is 131.48 million feet.
3.
    International Trade Commission, 2009.
4.
    American Plastics Manufacturing, Inc.
5.
    “By ‘Bagging It,’ Ireland Rids Itself of a Plastic Nuisance,”
New York Times
, January 31, 2008.
6.
    Substituting a local bag ban for a bag tax was the brainchild of San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, a quixotic Bay Area politician whose spectrum of achievements defies categorization. He graduated president of his class at the San Francisco Police Academy, worked for the district attorney investigating white-collar crime, cofounded the California Green Party and supported the legalization of marijuana. Mirkarimi argued that taking on the plastic bag “plague” was a necessary first step in healing environmental damage: “Instead of waiting for the federal government to do something about this country’s oil dependence, environmental degradation or contribution to global warming, local governments can step up and do their part. The plastic bag ban is one small part of that.”
7.
    California Secretary of State, lobbying activity reports.
8.
    “Miracle No: Groups Call on Major Leagues to Denounce Miracle-Gro Deal,”
SafeLawns.org
, March 14, 2010.
9.
    “Recall of Scotts Miracle-Gro Products,” EPA, Region 5 Pesticides, May 2008.

10.
   “Small Plastic Bag Lawsuit Could Have a Huge Impact on Green Business,”
Forbes
, June 21, 2011.

11.
   “Battle of the Bags,”
BagMonster.com
, September 25, 2011.

Other books

Love's Second Chance by Myne Whitman
Dark of Night - Flesh and Fire by Jonathan Maberry, Rachael Lavin, Lucas Mangum
Country of Cold by Kevin Patterson
Scorned by Ann, Pamela
The Accidental Encore by Hayes, Christy
Citizens Creek by Lalita Tademy
The Mistletoe Mystery by Caroline Dunford