VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDYaverage sample size of 258 pounds for residential waste and 286...

FINAL REPORT

VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY

June 2002

Prepared for: Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation

Solid Waste Program

Prepared By: DSM ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.

Po Box 466/23 Thrasher Road Ascutney, VT 05030 Tel: (802) 674-2840

Fax: (802) 674-6915

With Support From:

Chittenden Solid Waste District

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS DSM Environmental Services, Inc. (DSM) relied on the good will and logistical support of Casella Waste Management at the Waste USA landfill and Waste Systems International (WSI) at the Chittenden County transfer station. In both cases these companies provided, at no cost to DSM or the VT Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC), sorting space, front loader time to gather and deliver the samples, logistical support from the scale house to help select the loads, and, in the case of Waste USA, roll-off boxes to dump the sampled waste. Without this significant support the waste sorting could not have been carried out. Both Casella (All Cycle hauling division) and WSI also worked with DSM and the Chittenden Solid Waste Management District to collect representative samples of pure commercial wastes by category. VT DEC also provided significant support in the form of VT DEC personnel who sorted with DSM and the Chittenden District each day of the sampling period. It was this team effort that helped to complete the project successfully.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................... ii Observations On The Residential Waste Sorts ..............................................................iii Commercial Waste Composition .................................................................................... v

Office Wastes .............................................................................................................vi Retail Establishments .................................................................................................vi Restaurants ................................................................................................................vii Grocery......................................................................................................................vii Motels/Hotels ...........................................................................................................viii Mixed Commercial...................................................................................................viii Construction and Demolition Wastes......................................................................... ix

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1

OBJECTIVES OF THE WASTE COMPOSITION ANALYSIS ................................ 2

METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................ 3 Waste Sort Categories ..................................................................................................... 3

Load Selection............................................................................................................. 8 Residential................................................................................................................... 8 Commercial ................................................................................................................. 8 Construction and Demolition Waste ........................................................................... 9

Sampling Protocol ........................................................................................................... 9 Residential................................................................................................................... 9 Commercial ............................................................................................................... 10 Construction and Demolition .................................................................................... 11 Sample Selection ....................................................................................................... 12 Number of Samples and Sample Size ....................................................................... 12

Sorting Procedure.......................................................................................................... 13 PRESENTATION OF RESULTS ................................................................................. 14

Residential..................................................................................................................... 14 Paper.......................................................................................................................... 14 Bottles and Cans........................................................................................................ 17 Deposit Containers .................................................................................................... 17 Plastics....................................................................................................................... 17 Organics .................................................................................................................... 17 Other Wastes ............................................................................................................. 18 Observations On The Residential Waste Sorts ......................................................... 18

Commercial Waste Composition .................................................................................. 20 Office Wastes ............................................................................................................ 20 Retail Establishments ................................................................................................ 21 Restaurants ................................................................................................................ 24 Grocery...................................................................................................................... 24 Motels/Hotels ............................................................................................................ 24 Mixed Commercial.................................................................................................... 29

Observations On The Commercial Waste Sorts........................................................ 29 Construction and Demolition Wastes............................................................................ 31

TABLES & FIGURES

Table E.1 Number of Samples and Sample Size Figure E.1 Composition of Residential Waste Table E.2 Comparison of Urban/Rural and Summer/Winter Residential Results Table E.3 Office Sector Results Table E.4 Retail Sector Results Table E.5 Restaurant Results Table E.6 Grocery Sector Results Table E.7 Hotels/Motels Sector Table E.8 Mixed Commercial Load Results Figure E.2 C&D Load Observations Table 1. Sort Categories Used for Residential Waste Table 2. Commercial Waste Composition – Additional Sort Categories Table 3. Sort Categories Used for Construction and Demolition Waste Table 4. Sources of Pure Commercial Loads Table 5. Source of Construction Waste Loads Table 6. Number of samples and Sample Size Table 7.a Residential Waste Table 7.b Residential Waste, Comparison of Urban/Suburban and Rural Figure 1 Composition of Residential Waste Table 8. Office Waste Table 9. Retail Establishments Waste Table 10. Restaurant Waste Table 11. Grocery Waste Table 12. Motel/Hotel Waste Table 13. Mixed Commercial Waste Table 14. Estimated Composition of C & D Waste

APPENDICES

Appendix A. Detailed Residential and Commercial Data

FINAL REPORT-VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY - June 18, 2002 ii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY During the summer of 2001, DSM Environmental Services, Inc. (DSM) was contracted by the Solid Waste Program of the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC) to conduct a waste composition study at the Waste USA landfill in Coventry, VT and the WSI transfer station in Burlington, VT. DSM sub-contracted with the Chittenden Solid Waste Management District (CSWMD) for assistance with logistics and sorting at the WSI Transfer Station. These two locations were chosen to represent the urban/suburban (Chittenden County) and rural (Northeast Kingdom) populations of Vermont, to identify any differences in waste composition between these two populations. Sorting was carried out at the Waste USA landfill for five days in August (20 – 24th), and three days in November (19 – 21st) and at the WSI transfer station for five days in August (27 – 31st), and four days in November (5-8th). These sorting periods were selected to represent two seasons, with the hope of determining whether there were seasonal differences in Vermont’s waste composition. The primary objective of the sampling program was to collect data on the composition of the waste stream for use by the VT DEC to better target future waste reduction and diversion programs. As such, the categories selected for sorting were based on what can currently be recycled in Vermont as well as materials that might have potential for future diversion (such as food waste). The second objective was to search for categories of concern, such as electronics wastes and potentially hazardous wastes. Finally, VT DEC was interested in the potential for additional diversion of construction and demolition wastes. This executive summary has been written to give readers an overview and summary of the significant amount of data collected during the study. As such, the 26 waste categories have been consolidated into a small number of summary categories which do not necessarily match the more detailed tables contained in the text. In addition, averaging the waste composition data requires summing of the pounds of material from individual samples and then calculating the percent composition of the total. These summary tables presented as a comparison of broad material category percentages can not always be compared with the more detailed tables in the body of the report by simply taking the averages of the percents in the detailed tables. Table E.1 lists the number of samples and the average sample size (in pounds) for each generator category. Over the two sorting periods, 24,626 pounds from 91 samples were sorted. Fifty-one residential loads and 40 commercial loads were sampled, with an average sample size of 258 pounds for residential waste and 286 pounds for commercial waste.

FINAL REPORT-VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY - June 18, 2002 iii

TABLE E.1 Number of Samples and Sample Size

Generator Type Number of Samples

Average Sample Size

Total Sample Size

Residential (#) (lbs.) (lbs.) August, Waste USA 15 295 4,437 August, WSI 15 209 3,139 November, Waste USA 9 239 2,150 November, WSI 12 287 3,445 Sub-Total 51 258 13,171 Commercial Retail 7 158 1,108 Office 6 232 1,392 Restaurants 5 328 1,640 Grocery 6 306 1,837 Motels 2 196 391 Mixed Commercial Loads 14 363 5,087 Sub-Total 40 286 11,455 Total 91 n/a 24,626

Observations On The Residential Waste Sorts

Figure E.1 and Table E.2 illustrate what is left in the Vermont residential waste stream after ten years of public and private investment in recycling and HHW collection systems and education programs. Figure E.1 breaks out material that is currently recyclable in most Vermont programs to illustrate what percent of the material remaining in the residential waste stream is still recyclable, Table E.2 summarizes the waste composition data by major categories. For this reason one cannot directly compare Figure E.1 and Table E.1. For example, the recyclable paper category in Figure E.1 does not include books and coated boxboard while the paper category in Table E.2 does. DSM’s observations include:

• While Vermont has made impressive progress in increasing recycling of materials, approximately 24 percent of the residential waste stream remains recyclable paper and bottles and cans, which are accepted by most programs in Vermont.

• As illustrated by Table E.2, although there are variations between urban/suburban

and rural residential wastes, the differences are minor and probably reflect sampling variability rather than actual difference, indicating the relative homogeneity of residential generators throughout Vermont.

• There appears to be a significant difference in the organic fraction of the waste

stream between seasons. However, this difference is not due to the presence of yard wastes in the summer, but rather more fresh food waste in the summer.

• Plastics are a growing part of the waste stream. Of particular significance,

although they only represent 3 percent on a weight basis, is the relatively large volume of plastic films (exclusive of garbage bags) in the waste stream.

FINAL REPORT-VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY - June 18, 2002 iv

All Other Ferrous2%

Recyclable Containers7%

Recyclable Paper17%

Textiles5% Food Waste

21%

Dirty Paper9%

Other Waste Categories39%

Figure E.1 Composition of Residential Waste

(% by weight)

Figure E.1 Materials Included in Summary Categories

Summary Category Categories Included

Recyclable Paper Newspaper and inserts, Corrugated and kraft bags, Mixed paper, Magazine and coated paper, Boxboard

Recyclable Containers Glass bottles and jars, Plastic bottles, Ferrous cans, & Aluminum cans – Deposit & non-deposit

All Other Ferrous Brown and white goods

Food Waste Food waste

Textiles Textiles

Other Waste Categories

Books, Coated boxboard, Plastic clamshells, Plastic tubs, Plastic film, All other plastic, Leaf and yard waste, All other organic, Hazardous waste, Mercury containing waste, Bulky waste, Electronics and small appliances, Tires, Construction waste, All other waste

FINAL REPORT-VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY - June 18, 2002 v

Table E.2 Comparison of Urban/Rural and Summer/Winter - Residential Results

(% by weight)

• There is a significant amount of “dirty paper” (approximately 9%), especially paper plates and cups, in the waste stream.

• Food wastes (approximately 21%) were the largest single material on a weight

basis found in the residential waste stream. Therefore, organics management systems may be an important method for increasing diversion.

• Hazardous materials appear to be a relatively small fraction of the waste stream

(0.5%).

• Textiles are a significant enough part of the residential waste stream (5%) to consider further development of collection and marketing programs for this material.

• There were relatively insignificant quantities of both electronics (1.8%) and C&D

waste (4.2%) in all of the samples. Commercial Waste Composition Tables E.3 – E.8 summarize the results of the commercial waste sorts using the same recyclable material categories as for residential waste (Figure E.1) but including clean plastic film under the potentially recyclable plastic.

Urban/Suburban WSI Transfer Stn (%)

Rural Waste USA

(%)Urban/Suburban

WSI Transfer Stn (%)

Rural Waste USA

(%)Paper 18.3% 18.3% 20.6% 20.3%Plastic 10.2% 8.3% 8.7% 9.7%Metal 4.5% 4.6% 4.5% 5.2%Glass 1.6% 3.8% 2.9% 2.3%Organic (1) 39.1% 38.8% 26.8% 33.6%Other Waste 26.3% 26.3% 36.5% 28.9%

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%(1) Includes Dirty paper

AUGUST NOVEMBER

Major Categories

FINAL REPORT-VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY - June 18, 2002 vi

Office Wastes Six samples totaling 1,392 pounds of office waste were sorted. Table E.3 illustrates the composition of the office waste samples. As expected, paper is the largest single category, averaging 32 percent on a weight basis. The majority of the waste paper was white paper and non-white mixed papers, both of which are potentially recyclable. Magazines and other coated stock would also be recyclable.

Table E.3

Office Sector Results (% by weight)

AUGUST NOVEMBER

Recyclable Paper 22.7% 38.3% Recyclable Plastic (1) 3.3% 2.3% Ferrous & Aluminum Cans 3.2% 0.9% Glass Bottles 5.7% 1.4% Organic (2) 18.9% 18.9% Remaining Waste 46.6% 38.2% (1) Includes plastic bottles and clean plastic film (2) Exclusive of dirty paper

Retail Establishments Seven samples totaling 1,108 pounds of retail waste were sorted from a fairly broad spectrum of retail types. As such, as illustrated in the individual samples in Appendix A, there is a fairly wide range of composition. However, as illustrated in Table E.4, recyclable paper again represents the largest single category. In some cases corrugated containers were significant, especially in the August sorts, indicating that more could still be done to divert additional corrugated containers from the retail sector.

Table E.4 Retail Sector Results

(% by weight)

AUGUST NOVEMBER Recyclable Paper 35.6% 21.0% Recyclable Plastic (1) 7.5% 9.1% Ferrous & Aluminum Cans 1.1% 1.4% Glass Bottles 2.9% 1.3% Organic (2) 13.6% 15.4% Remaining Waste 39.3% 51.8% (1) Includes plastic bottles and clean plastic film (2) Exclusive of dirty paper

FINAL REPORT-VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY - June 18, 2002 vii

Restaurants Five samples totaling 1,640 pounds of restaurant wastes were sorted. As illustrated by Table E.5, organics dominated the restaurant waste stream, averaging 58 percent. Potentially recyclable plastic film was also significant (averaging 5.6%), although much of the plastic film was covered with food waste which increased its relative weight, and which also lowers its potential for recycling.

Table E.5 Restaurant Results

(% by weight)

AUGUST NOVEMBER Recyclable Paper 5.2% 12.8% Recyclable Plastic (1) 9.4% 4.7% Ferrous & Aluminum Cans 1.1% 0.9% Glass Bottles 2.2% 1.3% Organic (2) 59.9% 56.4% Remaining Waste 22.2% 23.9% (1) Includes plastic bottles and clean plastic film (2) Exclusive of dirty paper

Grocery Six samples totaling 1,837 pounds of grocery wastes were sorted. As illustrated in Table E.6, grocery wastes were also dominated by organic wastes (primarily food waste). However, a review of the individual grocery samples in Appendix A indicates that some grocery stores were separately managing organic wastes while others were not. Location of the store within a reasonable hauling distance of the Intervale Composting Facility did not appear to be a factor in whether the store diverted organics.

Table E.6

Grocery Sector Results (% by weight)

AUGUST NOVEMBER

Recyclable Paper 46.3% 20.1% Recyclable Plastic (1) 2.6% 5.2% Ferrous & Aluminum Cans 0.8% 1.1% Glass Bottles 2.6% 1.6% Organic (2) 39.4% 54.5% Remaining Waste 8.3% 17.5% (1) Includes plastic bottles and clean plastic film (2) Exclusive of dirty paper

FINAL REPORT-VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY - June 18, 2002 viii

Motels/Hotels Two samples totaling 392 pounds of motel wastes were sorted. The small sample size was the result of adding motels as a separate category in November. However these samples represent over ten motel and hotel establishments. Dirty paper (12.3%) represented a significant amount of waste. And, although not reflected in Table E.7, plastic garbage bags were significant, reflecting the common practice of lining all waste cans in each hotel room with clear plastic bags which are then removed each day, even though they might contain only tiny amounts of waste.

Table E.7

Hotels/Motels Sector (% by weight)

NOVEMBER

Recyclable Paper 27.4% Recyclable Plastic (1) 5.1% Ferrous & Aluminum Cans 1.1% Glass Bottles 9.0% Organic (2) 20.4% Remaining Waste 37.0% (1) Includes plastic bottles and clean plastic film (2) Exclusive of dirty paper

Mixed Commercial

During the August sampling period DSM sorted 14 samples totaling 5,087 pounds of mixed commercial wastes. In addition to the average composition of the 14 samples, a low and high range for each material category is included in Table E.8 to illustrate the fundamental difficulty with waste composition sorting of mixed commercial loads. As Table E.8 indicates, there are wide variations in material composition depending on the types of generators in the sampled load, as well as the area of the load sampled.

Table E.8 Mixed Commercial Load Results

(% by weight)

Average Low High Recyclable Paper 20.2% 9.4% 56.4% Recyclable Plastic (1) 4.9% 0.2% 13.6% Ferrous & Aluminum Cans 1.6% 0.0% 4.9% Glass Bottles 1.6% 0.0% 3.7% Organic (2) 36.6% 4.2% 51.8% Remaining Waste 35.1% 4.3% 59.4% (1) Includes plastic bottles and clean plastic film

(2) Exclusive of dirty paper

FINAL REPORT-VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY - June 18, 2002 ix

All other waste categories

24%

Drywall5%

Scrap metal7% Asphalt

shingles21%

Clean wood19%

Painted and pressure

treated wood24%

Construction and Demolition Wastes

DSM observed a total of 50 C&D waste loads at the two sorting locations during the two weeks of sampling in August, 2001. Figure E.2 displays the compilation of these observations. The percentages in Figure E.2 were calculated by weighting the percentage volume estimate from each load observed by the weight of that load to account for differences between 100-yard trailers and small truckloads. It should be noted that the composition estimates were all made based on volume and not adjusted for the differences in material densities. Wood waste made up between 33 and 54 percent of the total volume of the loads Wood Waste made up between 33 and 54 percent of the total volume of the loads observed, with clean wood totaling between 17 and 32 percent by volume. Second to wood waste was asphalt shingles totaling between approximately 15 and 26 percent by volume.

Figure E.2 C&D load observations

(% by volume)

FINAL REPORT-VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDY - June 18, 2002 1

INTRODUCTION

During the summer of 2001, DSM Environmental Services, Inc. (DSM) was contracted by the Solid Waste Program of the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC) to conduct waste sorting at the Waste USA landfill in Coventry, VT and the WSI transfer station in Burlington, VT. DSM sub-contracted with the Chittenden Solid Waste Management District (CSWMD) for assistance with logistics and sorting at the WSI Transfer Station. These two locations were chosen to represent the urban/suburban (Chittenden County) and rural (Waste USA) populations of Vermont, and to identify any differences in waste composition between these two populations. Sorting was carried out at the Waste USA landfill for five days in August (20 – 24th), and three days in November (19 – 21st) and at the WSI transfer station for five days in August (27 – 31st), and four days in November (5-8th). These sorting periods were selected to represent two seasons, with the hope of determining whether there were seasonal differences in Vermont’s waste composition. Samples of residential and commercial wastes were sorted at both locations. During the first sampling period in August, mixed commercial loads were selected for sampling. However, based on the wide range in composition due to the heterogeneous nature of commercial wastes, only “pure” loads of specific commercial generator categories were sorted in November (see below). This report presents the results of the four sorting events for both residential and commercial wastes. In addition, DSM performed a limited study of the composition of Construction and Demolition (C & D) waste. The results of these observations are also presented in this report.


OBJECTIVES OF THE WASTE COMPOSITION ANALYSIS

The primary objective of the sampling program was to collect data on the composition of the waste stream for use by the VT DEC and solid waste districts to better target future waste reduction and diversion programs. As such, the categories selected for sorting were based on what can currently be recycled in Vermont as well as materials that might have potential for future diversion (such as organic wastes). The second objective was to search for categories of concern, such as electronics wastes and potentially hazardous wastes. Finally, VT DEC was interested in the potential for additional diversion of construction and demolition wastes. It is important to note here that sorting waste material destined for the landfill does not provide information about the behavior of the generator with respect to waste reduction and recycling activities. The results only provide information on what the generator chose to dispose of. As such, one can only speculate about what the waste composition means with respect to waste generation and recycling behavior. Therefore, while DSM has made observations about potential implications of this study, verification would require studies targeting waste generation and diversion.


METHODOLOGY Waste Sort Categories Tables 1, 2, and 3 describe the categories into which the residential and commercial samples were sorted, and the categories by which the C&D waste were categorized. The following notes concerning the material categories may be useful when reading this report.

• The “all other organic” category consisted primarily of food waste. The organic wastes were negatively sorted and then shoveled off the floor of the sorting area and categorized as “all other organic.” In a “negative sort” other materials are removed (“positively sorted”) leaving a pile of material which is assumed to be all organic waste. Given the nature of a negative sort, and the difficulty of sorting through this material, the “all other organic” category necessarily contains small quantities of non-organic material such as broken glass, foil wrappers, and inerts (dirt, stone). DSM estimates that these other materials represented approximately 10 percent (by weight) of the organic waste category. Thus, if “all other organic” were 30 percent by weight of the total material sorted, then non-organic material remaining in the organic material would represent three percent of the total material sorted (0.3 x 0.1).

In the final stages of a negative sort of “all other organic” wastes


• For all but the last two days of the first round of sorting “dirty paper” (e.g., paper plates, napkins, paper towels, tissues) were included in the “all other organic” category. However, given the quantities of these dirty paper materials observed, at least on a volume basis, it was decided during the last two days of the first round of sorting to positively sort dirty paper from the organic wastes. This procedure was followed throughout the second round of sorting. Therefore, for comparison purposes, it is necessary to subtract “dirty paper” from the November paper category and add it to the “all other organics” category for consistent comparison between the August and November results.

• Because of the amount of moisture absorbed during the collection and compaction

process, the paper categories appear to be greater than they actually were at the time they were set out for collection. Based on an analysis conducted by DSM at the ROT composting facility in Hanover, NH, the paper could weigh twice as much saturated, as it would when originally set out for collection. During the first round of sampling in August, we encountered significantly wetter paper than during the November sampling, both as a result of greater quantities of wet organic wastes during August, and more rainfall. The wetness of the paper varied significantly, but based on our observations we have made the judgment that the paper was on average 30 percent heavier because of moisture absorbed in the compaction truck. As such, we have adjusted the reported August paper weights down by 30 percent to reflect this absorption of water. We did not adjust the November paper categories to account for excess moisture because the waste was much dryer. In addition, we did not adjust the weight of any other categories up when we subtracted 30 percent from the paper weights in August.

• Attempts were made to empty the contents out of any partially filled bottles and

cans. However, if the bottle or can was full, then the full container was placed in the “other waste” category because the container was assumed to be unavailable for recycling.

• The “other waste” category acted as a catch-all for materials which have limited

recycling potential given current technologies. This included baby and adult diapers, multi-material packaging (e.g., fiber/metal frozen orange juice containers), cat litter, plastic trash bags used for garbage, and, as stated above, full food or beverage containers.

• The broad category of “film” included all potentially recoverable films such as

grocery bags, food wraps, and snack food bags. A visual examination of the samples would indicate that there was a significant volume of film. However, because of the lightweight nature of film, the category is relatively small as a percentage of total weight. And, because of the large surface area of film, contaminants on the film probably make up as much as 40 to 50 percent of the weight reported, especially in the restaurant and grocery categories where the film was highly contaminated with moisture and food residues.


Category Description1 Newspaper and inserts All newspaper and shoppers inserted in newspapers

2 Corrugated and kraft bags Corrugated cardboard, including clean corrugated pizza boxes, and kraft bags/paper

3 Mixed paper White, office, colored and other paper, junk mail, softcover books, telephone books

4 Magazine and coated paper Magazines, catalogues and all other coated papers.

5 Boxboard (chipboard) Cereal boxes, chipboard and other paper food package boxes including clean pizza boxes made from chipboard

6 Coated Boxboard (waxed/film coated) Frozen food containers and twelve pack soda and beer containers

7 Dirty PaperPaper products that are typically too contaminated for recycling but that would break down easily during composting such as paper towels, napkins, etc.

8 Plastic bottles All #1 - 7 resin plastic bottlesdeposit plastic bottles sub-sort All beverage containers with the 5 cent deposit indicia

9 Plastic tubs Dairy containers and other #1 - 7 resin plastic tubs

10 Plastic containersFoamed polystyrene "clamshells", deli containers and other non-dairy food containers.

11 Plastic filmGrocery sacks, shrink wrap, clean plastic wrap, film food packaging

12 All other plastic Plastic products not categorized above13 Ferrous cans Steel and bi-metal food cans14 All other ferrous Scrap metal, brown and white goods15 Aluminum cans Beverage containers and any other aluminum cans

deposit aluminum cans sub-sort All beverage containers with the 5 cent deposit indicia16 Glass bottles and jars Mixed glass bottles and jars, not sorted by color

deposit glass bottles sub-sort All beverage containers with the 5 cent deposit indicia17 Aseptic Containers Milk, juice and other aseptic drink containers18 Leaf and yard waste Leaves, grass, small branches, brush

19 All other organic Primarily food wastes but also included "dirty paper" during most August sorts

20 Hazardous wasteLead acid and dry cell batteries, waste oil, paint, cleaners, lamps, solvents, etc.

Mercury containing products sub-sort Lamps, hearing aid batteries, etc.21 Textiles Clothing, towels, blankets22 Bulky waste Furniture, mattresses, swing sets, etc.

23 Electronics Computers, televisions, VCRs, CD players/stereos, radios, printers

24 Tires Car and truck tires

25 Construction waste Wood, roofing shingles, sheetrock, flooring, etc from new construction and demolition

26 All other waste Category for all other non-organic wastes

TABLE 1.Sort Categories Used for Residential Waste


Sorted mixed plastic film

Sector Additional Sort Categories DescriptionRetail White Office Paper White office and computer paper

Waxed Corrugated Corrugated containers with wax coating typically used for produce or other refrigerated food products.

Books Soft and hard cover booksClean Film Clear or white stretch or packaging film that was clean of

dirt, printing or excessive tape.Styrofoam Foam packaging materials including EPS

Clean WoodOffice White Office Paper White office and computer paper

Clean Film Clear or white stretch or packaging film that was clean of dirt, printing or excessive tape.

Books Bound books Styrofoam Foam packaging materials including EPSHotel/Motel White Office Paper White office and computer paper

Clean Film Clear or white stretch or packaging film that was clean of dirt, printing or excessive tape.

Restaurant Food waste Food waste All other organic waste Leaf and yard waste, dirt and all other non-food wasteClean Film Clear or white stretch or packaging film that was clean of

dirt, printing or excessive tape.Grocery Waxed Corrugated Corrugated container with wax coating typically used for

produce or other refrigerated goods.White Office Paper White office and computer paperClean Film Clear or white stretch or packaging film that was clean of

dirt, printing or excessive tape.

Commerical Waste Composition - Additional Sort CategoriesTABLE 2.


Category Description1 Asphalt shingles Asphalt roofing shingles in whole or in part.2 Clean wood Unpainted, unstained, and untreated wood pieces with and

without nails.3 Painted and pressure treated wood

Painted, stained, treated or otherwise altered wood pieces.4 Drywall Otherwise known as sheetrock, wall board, etc.5 Asphalt, brick and concrete (ABC) waste Any asphalt pieces, concrete or concrete blocks, bricks or

other masonry.6 Corrugated cardboard7 Scrap metal Any scrap metal object, including metal appliances or any

object that is primarily metal.8 Insulation Fiberglass, foam or any other type of insulation 9 Tiles and flooring Ceramic and linoleum tiles and flooring material including

all non-wood flooring material.10 Plastic Film Clean and dirty shrink wrap and plastic film 11 Rugs Carpeting, rugs12 Salvage Items Doors, windows, porcelain fixtures and other items used in

new construction and renovations that could be reused.13 Furniture Chairs, couches, mattresses and other furniture14 Hazardous wastes Lead acid and dry cell batteries, paints, solvents, stains,

waste oil, cleaners, lamps, etc. Mercury containing wastes Lamps, batteries, etc.

15 All other C&D waste Any other construction or demolition waste that doesn't fit into the above listed categories as well as household wastes, and electronics, and bedding

TABLE 3.Sort Categories Used for Visual Allocation of Construction and Demolition Waste


Load Selection

Residential One of the goals of the residential load selection process was to evaluate Chittenden County waste separately from more “rural” areas of Vermont to determine if there were any differences in the waste composition. As such, DSM worked with Waste USA personnel at the scale house to identify and select only pure residential loads from rural towns in the Northeast Kingdom as well as pure residential loads from St. Johnsbury and Newport. “Pure” loads are defined as containing waste from only one type of generator (in this case residential), as opposed to mixed loads of residential and commercial wastes. In Chittenden County an attempt was made to sample loads from a wide range of Chittenden County routes/municipalities. While we primarily concentrated on sampling residential loads delivered by WSI to their transfer station, we did sort two All Cycle loads for comparison purposes. We did not see any appreciable differences.

Commercial Loads sampled during the August sorting at Waste USA were primarily mixed commercial loads while at WSI (in August) we sorted a number of “pure” loads from specific generator categories as well as some mixed commercial loads. In the case of commercial loads, “pure loads” are defined as those from a specific commercial generator type (e.g., restaurants or offices) as opposed to mixed loads containing waste from different types of generators. During the second round of sampling in November we sorted only “pure” commercial loads from specific generator categories at both Waste USA and WSI. This was because the mixed commercial loads sampled in August had such a wide range in composition that it appeared the data would not be as useful as it could be for planning and management purposes. The generator categories selected for sampling were:

• Offices • Retail • Food Stores • Restaurants • Hotels/Motels (November only)

The tables for commercial wastes present the data from the specific generator categories first and then the data from the mixed loads for comparison purposes.


Construction and Demolition Waste Performing an analysis of C&D waste composition is resource intensive for two reasons:

• It is physically difficult to sort C&D waste without mechanized equipment, large containers, and scales to weigh the containers; and,

• C&D waste varies significantly requiring sorting of a large enough sample size to represent all the different types of construction, renovation and demolition jobs.

Due to the funds available for the Vermont waste composition study, DSM and the VT DEC agreed that a visual estimate of the composition of C&D waste would be conducted during residential/commercial waste composition sorting at the two sorting locations. To accomplish this DSM observed the unloading of a majority of the “pure” C&D loads delivered at the WSI transfer station and the Waste USA landfill during the ten sort days in the month of August. As each load was dumped DSM made a visual estimate of the composition of the load. No visual estimates of C&D waste composition were carried out during the November sorting period. Sampling Protocol

Residential DSM used the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) Uniform Waste Disposal Characterization Method methodology to determine the number of residential samples necessary to characterize the waste. The CIWMB methodology assumes that 30, 200 pound samples, distributed over a minimum of two seasons, can be “considered to be statistically representative” of the waste delivered to the sampling location. Therefore, DSM proposed to sort 15 residential samples at each location over each sample period (August and November), for a total of 30 samples per location (60 samples total). DSM did not, as part of the scope of work, propose to statistically evaluate the data for two reasons. First, to determine the mean, 90 percent confidence intervals, and standard deviation for individual material categories by site and generator type would be difficult. This is because sufficient data from other composition studies are not available for some of the material categories (e.g., hazardous wastes, electronics) to determine the mean and standard deviation (which are necessary to determining sample size). Second, in DSM’s opinion, statistical validity would apply only to the populations sampled from the two locations in Vermont, and could not necessarily be extrapolated to other areas of Vermont. However, as discussed below, the results of the August round of residential sampling at the two locations were so similar that it appeared likely that residential waste composition throughout Vermont would be similar. Therefore, it was agreed to reduce the number of residential samples during the second round of sampling to concentrate more on commercial waste sorting.


Commercial Initially, VT DEC elected to sample mixed commercial loads. However, as discussed above there was a wide range in composition observed during the August sampling. As a result, it was decided to modify the sample selection during the November sorting period to concentrate on specific commercial generator categories. Table 4 lists the five commercial generator categories sampled and the source of the loads within those categories.

Sector Load # Source of Load Date SortedRetail 1 Discount Department Store 29-Aug

2 Mall (Health & beauty, pet store, clothing, sporting goods) 30-Aug3 Mall (Clothing, gifts, shoes, books, dept store) 5-Nov4 Florist, Pharmacy, Hardware, Clothing & Sporting Goods

Store 5-Nov5 Signs, Auto Accessories, Tile Shop, Farm Store (hardware,

clothing, tools) 7-Nov6 Discount Dept Store, Clothing, Department Store,

Electronics Store 19-Nov7 Mall 20-Nov

Office 1 Professional Center, Construction Firm, Investment Firm, Post Office 29-Aug

2 Technology Firm 30-Aug

3Real Estate Development, Bank, Real Estate, Professional Center 5-Nov

4 Cell Phone Co, Bank, Financial Services, Post Office 6-Nov

5Property Management Office, Lab, Engineering Firm Professional Center, Consulting 7-Nov

6 Insurance Company 19-NovHotel/Motel 1 Motels (2), Inn 6-Nov

2 Residence Inns (2), Motel 7-NovRestaurant 1 Sit Down (3), Fast Food 27-Aug

2 Fast Food, Sit Down 29-Aug3 Sit Down and Take Out, Take Out, Fast Food 6-Nov4 Sit Down and Take Out, Fast Food, Sit Down (2) 8-Nov5 Sit Down (4), Fast Food (2) and Take Out (2) 21-Nov

Grocery 1 Supermarket 23-Aug2 Supermarket 28-Aug3 Supermarket 7-Nov4 Supermarket 8-Nov5 Supermarket 19-Nov6 Covenience Stores 19-Nov

Total: 26

TABLE 4.Sources of Pure Commercial Loads, August and November 2001


No attempt was made to sample sufficient loads within each commercial category to generate statistically valid results (CIWMB recommends 25, 125 pound samples per category). However, the data provide useful information for planning and management purposes.

Construction and Demolition Throughout the ten days of sampling in August DSM performed a visual assessment of the composition of the C&D loads as they were dumped. DSM first collected information on the source of the load and the type of construction job, if it was available from the driver. DSM then physically observed and recorded the composition of the load, estimating the percentage volume of seventeen different categories of construction and demolition waste. DSM also noted any unusual conditions about the load on the data sheet and obtained the scale weight of the load. Table 5 illustrates the reported breakdown of the sources of C&D waste observed. However, it should be noted that the breakdown of sources is based on information provided by the truck drivers. Often they were making an educated guess about what type of source they were picking up from. And, all of the large 100-yard loads observed at Waste USA contained an unknown mix of material from transfer stations. For this reason no attempt has been made to categorize the observations by generator type.

Waste USA WSI

(# loads) (# loads) (# loads) (%)Residential New construction 1 3 4 8% Demolition 5 4 9 18% Renovation 6 7 13 26% Roofing 4 2 6 12% Clean out 2 6 8 16%Commercial New construction 1 1 2 4% Demolition 2 1 3 6% Renovation 1 2 3 6%Mixed C&D (more than one job) 2 0 2 4%Total, Loads Observed: 24 26 50 100%

Estimated Volume, All Loads (cubic yards) (1) 634 415 1,049

TABLE 5.Source of Construction Waste Loads, by Job Type

(1) This was estimated from observations of load sizes and container sizes, but measurements were not taken.

Type of Construction CombinedSorting Location

Total Weight, All Loads (tons) 97.2 69.2 166


Sample Selection The goal was to take 200-pound and 150-pound samples from each of the identified residential, and commercial loads, respectively. To eliminate sample bias during selection of the sample location within each truck- load, two methodologies were used. During the August sorts the sample was selected from the truck- load of waste by mentally creating a grid for each emptied load by dividing it horizontally and then vertically to create 12 “blocks” of waste. We then systematically chose the sample location by starting at block 1 and going up during the day, beginning the next day where we left off the first day. For example, if we sampled two residential loads, and then two commercial loads and then a third residential load on day one, we would take the sample from block 1 for the first residential sample, block 2 for the second residential sample, and block 3 for the first commercial sample, ending the day with block 5, and beginning the next day with block 6. However, in some cases with the mixed commercial loads we would, after talking with the driver, choose to avoid a portion of the load that contained apartment waste or hospital wastes, so the block selection was not purely random in these cases. Based on the physical difficulties of extracting a bucket- load sample from the grid location we had selected (especially middle upper portions of the load, where the bucket would tend to push the waste rather then pick it up), it was decided for the November sort to simply always take the sample from the same location in the pile (the last material unloaded from the truck) for all samples. This eliminated any bias in selecting samples, and allowed the loader operator to go in from the bottom of the pile and lift up.

Number of Samples and Sample Size Table 6 lists the number of samples and the average sample size (in pounds) for each generator category. Over the two sorting periods, 24,626 pounds from 91 samples were sorted. Fifty-one residential loads and 40 commercial loads were sampled, with an average sample size of 258 pounds for residential waste and 286 pounds for commercial waste. It should be noted that using a large bucket loader to take a 200-pound sample is an art rather than a science. While we got better as the weeks went on, we did not consistently get similar weight samples. Lighter weight materials, such as packaging materials from retail wastes, were especially difficult, as were very heavy materials such as food wastes from restaurants and grocery stores.


TABLE 6. Number of Samples and Sample Size

Generator Type Number ofSamples

Average Sample Size

Total Sample Size

Residential (#) (lbs.) (lbs.) August, Waste USA 15 295 4437 August, WSI 15 209 3139 November, Waste USA 9 239 2,150 November, WSI 12 287 3,445 Sub-Total 51 258 13,171 Commercial Retail 7 158 1,108 Office 6 232 1,392 Restaurants 5 328 1,640 Grocery 6 306 1,837 Motels 2 196 391 Mixed Commercial Loads 14 363 5,087 Sub-Total 40 286 11,455 Total 91 n/a 24,626

Sorting Procedure Each sample was dumped on a clean area of the tipping floor (WSI) or on a tarp under cover at Waste USA. Plastic barrels for each material were then lined up around each sample in a logical order (e.g., all paper categories together, all bottles and cans together). The sorters then pulled materials out of the sample and placed them in the proper barrel. When the barrels were full they were weighed on a portable scale and the gross and tare weight recorded by material type. At the end of each sample the remaining pile was shoveled into barrels as “all other organic waste” and weighed. All weight data were recorded by one of the two DSM partners. All questions concerning the proper category to sort specific material in to were addressed by the same DSM partners who were present on all days of sorting. All sorters were trained prior to sorting.

Sorting into barrels by material type


PRESENTATION OF RESULTS The following sections are organized by generator type, with all of the residential samples summarized and discussed first, followed by similar summaries/discussions about each of the five commercial generator categories and the mixed commercial load samples. Finally the results of the C & D composition observations are presented. The sort results from each individual sample from which the summary tables are compiled are included in Appendix A for reference. Residential Tables 7.a and 7.b summarize the results of the waste composition sorts of 51 samples of residential waste representing a total of 13,171 pounds of solid waste. Each of the major residential waste material categories are discussed below.

Paper Paper remains the single largest category of potentially recyclable material1 in the residential waste stream, and the second largest category of material overall (if “dirty paper” is included). The paper category can be divided into two paper types: “clean paper” and “dirty paper”. During the August sort, “dirty paper” (e.g., tissue, paper towels, paper plates and cups) was included in the “all other organic” category, because it was assumed that this paper would not be available for recycling, but could be included in an organics management system. However, as it became obvious that this category represented a significant amount of material, the sorting procedure was changed in the last few days of the August sorting to separate the majority of this “dirty paper” out of the organic fraction. This provided a better illustration of the role of paper in the waste stream, and also provides better information for those looking to compost the organic fraction, since food waste and paper have different carbon/nitrogen ratios. Therefore, there are significant differences in Tables 7.a and 7.b in the paper and organic subtotals between August and November due to the addition of “dirty paper” to the paper category during the November sorts. Deducting the “dirty paper” from the November paper subtotal yields almost identical quantities of “clean paper” (18-20 percent of total waste) across both sort periods, and across “urban/suburban” and “rural” categories. Excluding books and coated boxboard, which are typically not recycled in residential programs, from the “clean paper” category, approximately 16 to 17.5 percent of total urban and rural residential waste respectively, remains potentially recyclable paper.

1 “Potentially recyclable” is defined as material that is currently accepted by the majority of recycling programs in Vermont.

TABLE 7.a Residential Waste, Percent by Weight

Category

Urban Suburban

(WSI Transfer Station)

Rural (Waste USA)

Urban Suburban

(WSI Transfer Station)

Rural (Waste USA)

Paper % % % %Newspaper and inserts (1) 2.4% 2.7% 2.9% 2.7%Corrugated and kraft bags (1) 2.7% 3.8% 6.0% 4.7%Mixed paper (1) 4.6% 4.3% 3.9% 4.7%Dirty Paper (1)(2) 0.0% 0.0% 9.5% 8.0%Magazine and coated paper 3.6% 3.6% 1.6% 2.8%Books 0.5% 0.0% 1.9% 0.1%Boxboard 2.3% 3.1% 1.7% 2.6%Coated boxboard 2.2% 0.8% 2.6% 2.5%

Paper Subtotal 18.3% 18.3% 30.1% 28.2%Plastic Plastic bottles 1.4% 2.2% 0.9% 2.3%Plastic bottles-deposit 0.3% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0%Plastic Clamshells 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.7%Plastic tubs (3) 0.6% 0.4% 0.2% 0.3%Plastic film 3.1% 2.7% 3.2% 2.7%All other plastic 4.9% 2.8% 3.6% 3.6%

Plastic Subtotal 10.2% 8.3% 8.7% 9.7%Metal Ferrous cans 1.2% 1.8% 1.2% 2.0%All other ferrous 2.7% 2.0% 2.9% 2.0%Aluminum cans 0.5% 0.5% 0.3% 1.2%Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.1%

Metal Subtotal 4.5% 4.6% 4.5% 5.2%Glass Glass bottles & jars 1.6% 3.4% 2.6% 2.2%Glass bottles & jars - deposit 0.0% 0.4% 0.3% 0.1%

Glass Subtotal 1.6% 3.8% 2.9% 2.3%Organic Food/All other organic 37.1% 38.5% 17.0% 25.6%Leaf and yard waste 2.0% 0.3% 0.3% 0.0%

Subtotal Organic 39.1% 38.8% 17.3% 25.6%Other Hazardous waste 0.9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.1%Mercury containing waste 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Textiles 4.4% 3.4% 5.6% 7.4%Bulky waste 2.6% 0.2% 0.0% 2.5%Electronics and small appliances 0.5% 1.1% 4.2% 1.3%Tires 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Construction waste 1.8% 6.3% 6.3% 2.5%All other waste 16.0% 14.7% 19.8% 15.2%Other Waste Subtotal 26.3% 26.3% 36.5% 28.9%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

(3) Plastic Tubs include clamshells (food service polystyrene) in August sort.(4) Numbers may not add due to rounding

August November

(1) Weights adjusted for moisture content (reduced by 30%)(2) Dirty paper included in "Food/All other Organic" in August "rural" sort.

TABLE 7.bResidential waste, Comparision of Urban/Suburban and Rural, Percent by Weight (1)

Category Urban/Suburban Rural CombinedPaper % % (%)Newspaper and inserts 2.7% 2.7% 2.7%Corrugated and kraft bags 4.4% 4.3% 4.3%Mixed paper 4.3% 4.5% 4.3%Dirty Paper (2) 9.5% 8.0% 8.8%Magazine and coated paper 2.6% 3.2% 2.9%Books 1.2% 0.0% 0.6%Boxboard 2.0% 2.9% 2.5%Coated boxboard 2.4% 1.7% 2.0%

Paper Subtotal 29.1% 27.3% 28.1%PlasticPlastic bottles 1.1% 2.2% 1.7%Plastic bottles-deposit 0.1% 0.1% 0.1%Plastic Clamshells 0.4% 0.2% 0.3%Plastic tubs 0.4% 0.4% 0.4%Plastic film 3.1% 2.7% 2.9%All other plastic 4.2% 3.1% 3.6%

Plastic Subtotal 9.3% 8.7% 9.0%MetalFerrous cans 1.2% 1.9% 1.5%All other ferrous 2.8% 2.0% 2.4%Aluminum cans 0.4% 0.7% 0.6%Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1% 0.2% 0.1%

Metal Subtotal 4.5% 4.8% 4.6%GlassGlass bottles & jars 2.1% 3.0% 2.6%Glass bottles & jars - deposit 0.2% 0.3% 0.2%Glass Subtotal 2.3% 3.3% 2.8%OrganicFood/All other organic (2) 17.0% 25.6% 21.3%Leaf and yard waste 1.1% 0.2% 0.7%

Subtotal Organic 18.1% 25.8% 22.0%Other Hazardous waste 0.8% 0.5% 0.6%Mercury containing waste 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Textiles 5.1% 4.7% 4.9%Bulky waste 1.3% 0.9% 1.1%Electronics and small appliances 2.4% 1.1% 1.8%Tires 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Construction waste 4.1% 5.1% 4.6%All other waste 18.0% 14.9% 16.4%

Other Waste Subtotal (3) 31.7% 27.2% 29.4%

(2) November sorts only

(1) Dirty paper and organic averages across the August and November sorting events combine disparate data where some organic samples include dirty paper and some do not. Refer to Table 7.a and the text for a full explanation. All other categories are comparable across all sampling events.

(3) Because of the way paper and organic categories are reported in this table, the totals do not add to 100 %.


Bottles and Cans The other potentially recyclable category is “bottles and cans”. Subtracting out plastics that are not currently collected for recycling (e.g., film, tubs, miscellaneous plastics), approximately 7 percent of the total residential waste stream is plastic and glass bottles, and ferrous and aluminum cans. As with paper, urban/suburban households are placing less of these recyclables in the garbage (perhaps due to more curbside collection programs in urban/suburban areas) than rural households. On average approximately 5 percent of urban/suburban residential waste is potentially recyclable bottles and cans compared to 8 percent of rural residential waste.

Deposit Containers Sub-sorts of bottles and cans were carried out to identify how many deposit beverage containers were discarded. As illustrated by the waste composition tables, there were few deposit containers discarded in the waste stream, confirming the high capture rates for deposit containers reported in the literature.

Plastics Plastics, other than plastic bottles, represented approximately 8 percent of the waste stream. Of particular interest is plastic film, representing an average of 3 percent. This is significant, given the lightweight nature of plastic film, although the weight of plastic film is exaggerated by the significant amount of moisture and dirt due to of the large surface area of the film. It is also interesting to note that the percent of plastic bottles on a weight basis are beginning to approach glass bottles. Given the lightweight nature of plastic bottles this illustrates the continued shift of packaging from glass to plastics.

Organics The largest single category remaining in the waste stream is organic material – primarily food wastes. Assuming that “dirty paper” in August was similar to “dirty paper” in November, then the organic fraction ranged from a low of 17.3 percent (“urban/suburban”, November) to a high of 37 percent (“urban/suburban”, August). These percentages should be reduced by an estimated three percent to account for broken glass and small pieces of paper, plastic, and other residue, remaining in the organic fraction that was shoveled up at the end of the sort. Our observations are that the majority of the organic fraction was food waste – both food preparation waste and plate waste. It was higher in August because there was more fresh food available from gardens and markets. The difference in organic waste between seasons was not due to yard wastes (which had originally been anticipated), but instead to much lower quantities of food wastes present in the waste stream in November. In general, yard wastes remained relatively insignificant through out all the sorts. It is not


known whether the lack of yard waste was due to the abnormally dry summer or to resident’s habits of disposing of yard waste on-site.

Other Wastes “Other wastes” represent an average of 28 percent of the total residential waste stream. Of particular interest are potentially hazardous wastes, and textiles. Potentially hazardous wastes (or more accurately, wastes which could potentially pose an environmental threat from land disposal) represented approximately 0.7 percent of the total waste stream. Virtually none of this was mercury containing wastes. Textiles were a significant amount of the waste stream, averaging 4 percent in August and 6.5 percent in November. Electronics and other small appliances averaged 2 percent (rounded) over the four sorts. Construction and demolition wastes averaged 3.3 percent of the waste stream, although this average was increased by the high amount in the “urban/suburban” WSI sorts (6.3 percent).

Observations On The Residential Waste Sorts

Figure 1 presents a graphic illustration of what is left in the Vermont residential waste stream after ten years of public and private investment in recycling and HHW collection systems and education programs. DSM’s observations include:

• While the State has made impressive progress in increasing recycling of materials,

approximately 24 percent of the residential waste stream remains recyclable paper and bottles and cans, which are accepted by most programs in Vermont. It is impossible to determine, without conducting capture rate studies, how difficult it would be to divert additional amounts of these potentially recyclable materials. Capture rate studies entail collecting and sorting material set out for recycling and material set out for disposal from a sample of households. The percent of each potentially recyclable material set out for recycling can be compared to the percent set out in the garbage. Materials with a high percentage set out for recycling (i.e., a high capture rate) have less potential for additional diversion than materials with low capture rates. Capture rate studies would indicate whether Vermont is approaching high levels of diversion (80% capture rates) of materials, or whether there is potential to significantly increase diversion because existing capture rates are low.


Figure 1. Composition of Residential Waste

(% by weight)

Figure 1. Materials Included in Summary Categories

Summary Category Categories Included

Recyclable Paper Newspaper and inserts, Corrugated and kraft bags, Mixed paper, Magazine and coated paper, Boxboard

Recyclable Containers Glass bottles and jars, Plastic bottles, Ferrous cans, & Aluminum cans – Deposit & non-deposit

All Other Ferrous Brown and white goods

Food Waste Food waste

Textiles Textiles

Other Waste Categories

Books, Coated boxboard, Dirty paper, Plastic clamshells, Plastic tubs, Plastic film, All other plastic, Leaf and yard waste, All other organic, Hazardous waste, Mercury containing waste, Bulky waste, Electronics and small appliances, Tires, Construction waste, All other waste

• Non-bottle plastics are a growing part of the waste stream. Of particular

significance are the relatively large amounts (on a volume basis) of plastic films (exclusive of garbage bags) in the waste stream. The new curbside collection programs in Seattle, Washington, which include residential films, may provide some guidance to evaluate the potential for film collection programs in Vermont in the future. Of particular importance will be markets for mixed color and resin films, because it would be impossible to require separate collection by color and

All Other Ferrous Metal2%

Recyclable Containers

7%

Recyclable Paper17%

Textiles5% Food Waste

21%

Dirty Paper9%

All Other Waste Categories

39%


resin. The markets must also be capable of handling relatively high contamination rates due to the large surface area of film.

• There is a significant amount of “dirty paper”, especially paper plates and cups in the waste stream indicating that many households take advantage of the convenience of disposable plates and napkins.

• Food wastes were the largest single material on a weight basis found in the residential waste stream. Therefore, organics management systems provide the potential for significantly increasing diversion. There are a wide range of technologies and systems potentially available to manage this material including: aerobic composting; sink grinders for discharge to waste water treatment plants; and, anaerobic decomposition, either separately, or as part of a “bio-reactor” landfill.

• Hazardous materials appear to be a relatively small fraction of the waste stream. And, interestingly, there did not appear to be a significant difference in quantities of these materials found in the waste stream between Chittenden County, which has the most highly developed HHW collection programs in Vermont, and northeast Vermont. There is no way to know from the waste composition studies whether hazardous materials are not being generated or are being generated but stored, or disposed of, in some other way.

• Textiles are a significant enough part of the residential waste stream to consider further development of collection and marketing programs for this material.

• There were relatively insignificant quantities of both electronics and C&D waste in all of the samples. This may be in part because these materials are collected separately from residential waste set-out at the curb, or because households store these materials instead of disposing of them.

Commercial Waste Composition

Office Wastes Six samples totaling 1,392 pounds of office waste were sorted. Table 8 illustrates the composition of the office waste samples. As expected, paper is the largest single category, at 54 percent of total waste. However, as with the residential waste stream, “dirty paper” represented almost one-half of the paper category for the August sort. In August, the office waste loads received for sampling contained a significant amount of bathroom and lunchroom wastes. Efforts were made to avoid these waste areas in November, resulting in much lower levels of “dirty paper”. Using the November samples as the more representative samples, the majority of the office waste paper was white paper and non-white mixed papers, both of which are potentially recyclable. Magazines and other coated stock would also be recyclable. It is also interesting to note that plastic film was significant in this category, as was food wastes. Electronics wastes were not significant.


Finally, although a relatively small amount on a weight basis, recyclable bottles and cans were significant, and represent another area where more effort to increase recycling might be worthwhile.

Retail Establishments Seven samples totaling 1,108 pounds of retail waste were sorted from a fairly broad spectrum of retail types. As such, as illustrated in the individual samples in Appendix A, there is a fairly wide range of composition. However, as illustrated in Table 9, paper again represents the largest single category. In some cases corrugated containers were significant, especially in the August sorts, indicating that more could still be done to divert additional corrugated containers from the retail sector. Again, plastic film was significant, representing on average 10 percent of the total waste stream, with the majority of plastic film being clean film that might have some market value. All other plastics were also significant, although, except for plastic bottles, most of the remaining plastic has low recycling value.

TABLE 8.Office

Category August NovemberPaperNewspaper and inserts 4.1% 3.3%Corrugated and kraft bags 3.3% 8.7%White office paper 8.3% 9.6%Non-white mixed paper 3.2% 9.6%Dirty Paper (1) 25.4% 13.7%Books 0.5% 0.3%Magazines, coated paper 2.8% 4.6%Boxboard 1.0% 2.5%Coated boxboard 5.6% 1.7%Paper Subtotal 54.2% 54.0%Plastic All Plastic bottles 1.8% 0.7%Plastic bottles deposit 0.8% 0.2%Plastic Film (clean) 0.7% 1.4%Plastic Film (dirty) 2.8% 0.9% Plastic Film Subtotal 3.6% 2.3%Plastic clamshells 0.0% 0.5%All other plastic 5.5% 3.0%Foam 0.0% 0.3%

Plastic Subtotal 11.6% 7.0%Metal Ferrous cans 2.4% 0.5%All other ferrous 1.1% 1.9%Aluminum cans and foil 0.5% 0.3%Aluminum cans - deposit 0.4% 0.1%

Metal Subtotal 4.3% 2.8%Glass Glass bottles and jars 5.7% 1.4%Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0% 0.0%

Glass Subtotal 5.7% 1.4%Organic Leaf and yard waste 0.4% 1.6%Food/All other organic 18.5% 17.3%

Organic Material Subtotal 18.9% 18.9%Other Waste Hazardous waste 0.0% 0.2%Mercury containing waste 0.0% 0.2%Bulky waste 0.0% 0.0%Electronics 0.6% 0.6%Construction waste 0.1% 5.3%All other waste 4.7% 9.5%

Other waste Subtotal 5.3% 15.9%

Total 100.0% 100.0%(1) Napkins and paper towels make up the vast majority of this category.

TABLE 9. Retail Establishments

Category August NovemberPaperNewspaper and inserts 1.6% 3.6%Corrugated and kraft bags 23.3% 6.0%White Office Paper 1.2% 3.0%Non-white mixed paper 1.7% 1.7%Dirty Paper 4.0% 9.1%Books 0.0% 0.0%Magazines, coated paper 2.9% 4.1%Boxboard 4.8% 2.7%Coated boxboard 2.2% 3.3%Paper Subtotal 41.8% 33.4%Plastic 0.0%Plastic tubs 0.0% 0.1%Plastic Containers (not tubs) 0.0% 0.3%All Plastic bottles 1.5% 1.4%Plastic bottles deposit 0.3% 0.0%Plastic Film (clean) 5.7% 7.7%Plastic Film (dirty) 3.7% 2.5% Plastic Film Subtotal 9.4% 10.3%All other plastic 10.3% 5.0%Foam 0.0% 1.0%Plastic Subtotal 21.4% 18.0%Metal Ferrous cans 0.6% 1.3%All other ferrous 1.6% 9.3%Aluminum cans and foil 0.4% 0.1%Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1% 0.0%Metal Subtotal 2.7% 10.7%Glass Glass bottles and jars 2.9% 1.1%Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0% 0.2%Glass Subtotal 2.9% 1.3%Organic Food/All other organic 13.6% 15.4%Leaf and yard waste 0.0% 0.0%Organic Subtotal 13.6% 15.4%Other Hazardous waste 0.0% 0.7%Mercury containing waste 0.0% 0.0%Bulky waste 0.0% 0.0%Textiles 2.2% 0.2%Construction waste 1.2% 11.9%All other waste 14.2% 8.4%Other Waste Subtotal 17.6% 21.2%

Total 100.0% 100.0%


Restaurants Five samples totaling 1,640 pounds of restaurant wastes were sorted. As illustrated by Table 10, there were no surprises, with organics dominating the waste stream at 64 percent. Again, plastic film was significant, although much of the plastic film was covered with food waste which increased its relative weight, and which also lowers its potential for recycling.

Sorting through restaurant waste

Grocery Six samples totaling 1,837 pounds of grocery wastes were sorted. As illustrated in Table 11, grocery wastes were also dominated by food wastes. However, a review of the individual grocery samples in Appendix A indicates that some grocery stores were separately managing organic wastes while others were not. Location of the store within a reasonable hauling distance of the Intervale Composting Facility did not appear to be a factor in whether the store diverted organics. As with retail establishments, some grocery stores were also better at separating corrugated containers then others, indicating room for improvement in paper recycling.

Motels/Hotels

Two samples totaling 391 pounds of motel wastes were sorted. The small sample size was the result of adding motels as a separate category in November. However these


samples represent over ten motel and hotel establishments. Here again dirty paper was a significant source of waste. And, although not reflected in Table 12, plastic garbage bags were significant, reflecting the common practice of lining all waste cans in each hotel room with clear plastic bags which are then removed each day, even though they might contain only tiny amounts of waste. There was also the potential to increase recycling from the sampled hotels and motels, with both recyclable paper such as newspapers and magazines, and recyclable bottles and cans prevalent in the sampled waste. Food waste was also significant due to the common practice of serving breakfast at many motels and hotels.

TABLE 10. Restaurants

Category August NovemberPaperCorrugated and kraft bags 2.0% 8.8%Waxed bags 0.0% 1.4%Mixed paper 0.0% 1.7%Magazines, coated paper 0.0% 4.2%Newspaper and inserts 1.1% 1.6%Boxboard 2.0% 4.9%Coated boxboard 5.3% 1.8%Paper Subtotal 10.5% 24.5%Plastic All Plastic bottles 1.6% 1.7%Plastic bottles deposit 0.3% 0.1%Plastic clamshells 0.0% 1.0%Plastic tubs 0.7% 0.6%Plastic film 7.5% 6.5%All other plastic 6.0% 3.0%Plastic Subtotal 16.0% 12.9%Metal Ferrous cans 0.8% 0.8%All other metal 0.6% 0.6%Aluminum cans and foil 0.1% 0.8%Aluminum cans - deposit 0.2% 0.0%Metal Subtotal 1.7% 2.2%Glass Glass bottles and jars 1.6% 2.1%Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.6% 0.2%Glass Subtotal 2.2% 2.3%Organic Food Waste/ All other organic 59.9% 22.5%Dirty Paper 0.0% 19.9%Organic Subtotal 59.9% 42.4%Other Hazardous waste 0.0% 0.0%Bulky waste 0.0% 0.0%Construction waste 0.0% 1.4%Textiles 0.0% 1.3%All other waste 9.7% 13.0%Other Waste Subtotal 9.7% 15.7%

Total 100.0% 100.0%(1) In August, food waste was not seperated form other organic material such as compostable paper.

TABLE 11.Grocery

Category August NovemberPaperNewspaper and inserts 13.4% 3.4%Waxed occ 0.0% 3.1%Corrugated and kraft bags 8.6% 11.9%Mixed paper 0.2% 0.6%Dirty paper 0.0% 1.2%Magazines, coated paper 8.5% 0.1%Boxboard 15.5% 1.0%Coated boxboard 3.2% 2.9%Paper Subtotal 49.5% 24.2%Plastic All Plastic bottles 0.5% 0.8%Plastic bottles deposit 0.1% 0.0%Plastic clamshells 0.0% 1.2%Plastic tubs 0.1% 0.2%Plastic film 2.0% 4.4%All other plastic 4.8% 2.9%Plastic Subtotal 7.5% 9.5%Metal Ferrous cans 0.2% 0.9%All other ferrous 0.0% 1.0%Aluminum cans 0.5% 0.2%Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1% 0.0%Metal Subtotal 0.8% 2.1%Glass Glass bottles and jars 1.8% 0.8%Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.8% 0.8%Glass Subtotal 2.6% 1.6%Organic Food Waste 0.0% 48.0%All other organic 39.4% 6.5%Organic Subtotal 39.4% 54.5%Other Bulky Waste 0.0% 0.0%Construction waste 0.0% 0.9%Hazardous Waste 0.0% 0.0%Textiles 0.1% 0.4%All other waste 0.2% 6.7%Other Waste Subtotal 0.2% 8.0%

Total 100.0% 100.0%(1) In August, food waste was not seperated form other organic material such as compostable paper.

TABLE 12. Motels/Hotels

Category NovemberPaperNewspaper and inserts 8.4%Corrugated and kraft bags 3.2%Mixed paper 5.5%Dirty Paper 12.3%Books 0.0%Magazine and coated pap 7.9%Boxboard 2.3%Waxed/film boxboard 2.2%Paper Subtotal 41.9%Plastic Plastic bottles 2.5%Plastic bottles-deposit 0.5%Plastic clamshells 1.2%Plastic tubs 0.4%Plastic film 2.2%All other plastic 3.0%Plastic Subtotal 9.7%Metal Ferrous cans 0.3%All other ferrous 0.3%Aluminum cans 0.4%Aluminum cans - deposit 0.3%Metal Subtotal 1.4%Glass Glass bottles and jars 6.0%Glass bottles - deposit 3.0%Glass Subtotal 9.0%Organic Leaf and yard waste 0.3%Food/All other organic 20.1%Organic Subtotal 20.4%Other Hazardous waste 0.0%Hazardous mercury 0.0%Textiles 5.8%Bulky waste 0.0%Electronics 0.0%Tires 0.0%Construction waste 0.0%All other waste 11.9%Other Waste Subtotal 17.6%

Total 100.0%


Mixed Commercial During the August sampling period DSM sorted 14 samples totaling 5,087 pounds of mixed commercial wastes. In addition to the average composition of the samples, a low and high range for each material category is included in Table 13 to illustrate the difficulty with waste composition sorting of mixed commercial loads3. As Table 13 indicates, there are wide variations in material composition depending on the types of generators in the sampled load, as well as the area of the load sampled. For example, the average composition of corrugated was 8.2 percent. Using this average one might conclude that there is still some corrugated left to recover, although not a significant amount. However, as the range shows, some commercial establishments are either not generating any corrugated, or recycling most of their corrugated, while other commercial establishments are generating and not recycling a significant amount of corrugated (at 35.9% of total waste).

Observations On The Commercial Waste Sorts A review of commercial waste composition by generator indicates that potential remains to increase diversion of traditional paper and bottle and can recyclables. In addition, food wastes, which could potentially be diverted to separate organics management facilities, are prevalent in large quantities from some restaurant and grocery generators. Finally, as with residential waste, plastic film represents a significant, and apparently growing portion of the commercial waste stream. Barriers to increased diversion of materials from commercial generators which must be overcome to realize this increased diversion include the following: C In most cases it would be necessary for the commercial generator to keep additional

materials separated to increase diversion. This requires space which may not be available or is costly (commercial space is typically leased on a square foot basis), as well as additional containers. In many cases these containers must also be leased from the haulers, creating a monthly charge which must be overcome by potential savings in avoided refuse pull and disposal charges.

C Separation and consolidation of materials also requires additional labor. For example, cardboard boxes must be emptied of contaminants such as foam packaging and coat hangers, and then broken down flat for storage. Typically, the labor that would be used is the lowest cost/highest turnover labor requiring supervision and training.

C Separate storage of organic wastes may increase odor and health issues at grocery and restaurant establishments which rely on their reputation of cleanliness. As a consequence, pick-up schedules, storage and container cleaning become significant cost issues.

C Plastic films are bulky to store and easily contaminated, in addition, many generators may receive a number of different film types that may be incompatible unless low-grade markets for the film are developed.

3 Table 13 presents the mean value and high and low range of thirteen of the fourteen samples. The fourteenth sample represented a cleanout of an institution and therefore was excluded from the comparison.

TABLE 13. Mixed Commercial

(August Only)

CategoryAverage Low High

Paper Newspaper and inserts 2.7% 1.1% 7.4%Corrugated and kraft bags 8.2% 1.6% 35.9%White Office Paper 1.1% 0.0% 14.0%Non-white mixed paper 4.3% 0.5% 15.7%Dirty Paper 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Magazines, coated paper 1.5% 0.0% 9.0%Boxboard 2.4% 0.0% 5.3%Coated boxboard 0.5% 0.0% 2.9%Books 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Paper Subtotal 20.7% 9.4% 59.3%Plastic All Plastic bottles 2.1% 0.0% 5.0%Plastic bottles deposit 0.1% 0.0% 0.3%Plastic Film Clean 2.7% 0.2% 8.3%Plastic Film Dirty 0.7% 0.0% 4.2%All other plastic 4.1% 0.2% 18.1%Plastic tubs 0.2% 0.0% 1.0%Plastic Subtotal 9.8% 3.0% 23.6%Metal Ferrous cans 1.2% 0.0% 3.9%All other ferrous 3.7% 0.0% 24.1%Aluminum cans and foil 0.2% 0.0% 0.7%Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1% 0.0% 0.3%Scrap metal 0.0% 0.0% 0.7%Metal Subtotal 5.3% 1.6% 24.1%Glass Glass bottles and jars 1.3% 0.0% 3.3%Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.2% 0.0% 1.2%Glass Subtotal 1.6% 0.0% 3.7%Organic Leaf and yard waste 0.1% 0.0% 1.2%All other organic 36.4% 4.2% 51.8%Organic Subtotal 36.6% 4.2% 51.8%Other Hazardous waste 0.3% 0.0% 3.8%Small appliances 1.0% 0.0% 6.4%Electronics 4.0% 0.0% 40.3%Construction waste 1.7% 0.0% 7.6%Textiles 3.4% 0.0% 23.1%Tires 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%Clean wood 0.6% 0.0% 1.8%All other waste 15.1% 3.7% 42.1%Other Waste Subtotal 26.1% 4.1% 59.4%Total 100.0%

Range


Solid waste districts interested in increasing commercial waste diversion must be prepared to work closely with private haulers and the business community to overcome these barriers. Construction and Demolition Wastes DSM observed a total of 50 C&D waste loads at the two sorting locations during the two weeks of sampling in August, 2001. Table 14 displays the compilation of these observations. The percentages in Table 14 were calculated by weighting the percentage volume estimate from each load observed by the weight of that load to account for differences between 100-yard trailers and small truckloads. It should be noted that the composition estimates were all made based on volume and not adjusted for the differences in material densities. As shown in Table 14, wood waste made up between 33 and 54 percent of the total volume of the loads observed, with clean wood totaling between 17 and 32 percent by volume. Second to wood waste was asphalt shingles totaling between approximately 15 and 26 percent by volume. The major difference between the loads at Waste USA and WSI was the amount of scrap metal in the loads (3 and 11 percent respectively). Part of the reason for the higher scrap metal quantities at WSI is that WSI is willing to remove the scrap metal after delivery on the tip floor. In addition, more furniture was found in the loads at WSI than in the loads at Waste USA. Some of the WSI loads would better be categorized as bulky waste even though it was designated as “construction waste”, as the load was a cleanout prior to a renovation job. Other observations about the results include that hazardous wastes were found in very small quantities (less than 0.5 percent of the load by volume) in both locations. Asphalt, brick and concrete (ABC) waste was also found in very small quantities at both locations. Finally, the all other C&D waste category was used as a catch-all for different wastes such as plastic compound buckets, plastic crates, nail boxes, non recyclable packaging, electronics, rugs, bedding, broken tools, bottles and cans and other municipal solid waste. However, most of this material that is currently recyclable was observed in very small quantities in each load.

Category Waste USA WSI AveragePainted and pressure treated wood 31.8% 17.2% 24.5%Clean wood (1) 22.5% 16.0% 19.3%Asphalt shingles 15.3% 26.1% 20.7%Drywall 5.6% 4.2% 4.9%Insulation 3.5% 3.5% 3.5%ABC waste 0.2% 0.0% 0.1%Corrugated cardboard 3.8% 1.9% 2.9%Scrap metal 3.0% 11.0% 7.0%Hazardous wastes 0.0% 0.1% 0.0%Hazardous wastes w/ mercury 0.3% 0.1% 0.2%Plastic Film 0.4% 0.2% 0.3%Furniture (chairs/couches/matresses) 1.7% 6.5% 4.1%Rugs 0.7% 0.3% 0.5%Tiles, flooring 0.5% 0.4% 0.4%All other C&D waste (2) 10.7% 12.4% 11.6%TOTAL 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% (1) Includes nails.(2) Misc. waste that doesn't fit into any other categories.(3) Volume based estimates made by observation only. Averages shown were weighted by load weight.

TABLE 14.Estimated Composition of C & D Waste, By Volume

(August Only)

Percentage of Total Material by Volume(3)

APPENDIX A

RESULTS OF INDIVIDUAL SORTS

APPENDIX A

RESIDENTIAL

Waste USA August 20-24, 2001 Residential Waste

*=weights adjusted by 30% for moisture 8/20 Granby 8/20 Newport 8/20 Fairfield 8/21 Charlestown 8/21 Troy 8/21 Maidstone 8/21 Derby 8/22Category Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % NetPaperNewspaper and inserts * 21.7 1.6% 11.6 5.9% 7.4 2.7% 5.0 1.5% 7.8 3.7% 2.0 0.8% 5.9 4.0% 5.3Corrugated and kraft bags * 38.2 2.9% 6.7 3.4% 13.9 5.1% 16.2 4.8% 5.6 2.7% 6.4 2.6% 4.3 3.0% 9.0Mixed paper * 49.1 3.7% 13.3 6.8% 19.6 7.2% 8.5 2.5% 6.6 3.1% 0.4 0.2% 4.8 3.3% 0.7Dirty Paper * 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Books 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Magazine and coated paper 25.3 1.9% 7.8 4.0% 5.7 2.1% 12.2 3.6% 2.0 1.0% 0.0 0.0% 10.6 7.2% 3.0Boxboard 22.0 1.7% 5.0 2.5% 4.8 1.8% 13.2 3.9% 8.2 3.9% 8.8 3.5% 2.2 1.5% 4.5 Waxed/film boxboard 0.0 0.0% 7.0 3.6% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 4.0 1.6% 9.7 6.6% 5.8Paper Subtotal 156.2 11.8% 51.3 26.1% 51.3 18.8% 55.2 16.5% 30.2 14.4% 21.7 8.7% 37.6 25.7% 28.2Plastic

Plastic bottles 22.9 1.7% 0.9 0.5% 9.5 3.5% 7.2 2.1% 3.6 1.7% 6.4 2.6% 3.6 2.5% 3.9 Plastic bottles-deposit 2.5 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.8 0.3% 0.8 0.2% 0.4 0.2% 0.8 0.3% 1.0 0.7% 0.0Plastic clamshells 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Plastic tubs 0.8 0.1% 0.9 0.5% 0.0 0.0% 1.7 0.5% 1.6 0.8% 1.2 0.5% 0.6 0.4% 0.2Plastic film 12.6 1.0% 0.9 0.5% 1.5 0.5% 13.6 4.1% 7.8 3.7% 6.4 2.6% 3.4 2.3% 27.0All other plastic 25.9 2.0% 1.5 0.8% 8.7 3.2% 11.0 3.3% 2.5 1.2% 22.0 8.8% 6.3 4.3% 3.0Plastic Subtotal 64.7 4.9% 4.2 2.1% 20.5 7.5% 34.3 10.2% 15.9 7.6% 36.8 14.7% 14.9 10.2% 34.1Metal

Ferrous cans 11.5 0.9% 3.8 1.9% 1.3 0.5% 9.2 2.7% 6.8 3.2% 2.6 1.0% 5.4 3.7% 4.0All other ferrous 26.7 2.0% 0.0 0.0% 7.7 2.8% 14.5 4.3% 1.1 0.5% 7.3 2.9% 0.0 0.0% 1.2Aluminum cans 4.8 0.4% 0.2 0.1% 1.1 0.4% 1.4 0.4% 0.8 0.4% 4.2 1.7% 1.0 0.7% 1.0 Aluminum cans - deposit 2.5 0.2% 0.3 0.1% 0.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.1% 0.8 0.3% 0.1 0.1% 1.0Metal Subtotal 45.5 3.4% 4.3 2.2% 10.2 3.7% 25.1 7.5% 8.9 4.2% 14.9 6.0% 6.5 4.4% 7.2Glass

Glass bottles and jars 22.7 1.7% 11.1 5.6% 0.9 0.3% 8.0 2.4% 10.4 5.0% 14.8 5.9% 8.0 5.5% 8.0 Glass bottles and jars - deposit 7.5 0.6% 0.4 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 2.4 1.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Glass Subtotal 30.2 2.3% 11.5 5.8% 0.9 0.3% 8.0 2.4% 10.4 5.0% 17.2 6.9% 8.0 5.5% 8.0Organic material

Leaf and yard waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0All other organic 506.3 38.3% 56.7 28.8% 23.3 8.5% 156.2 46.6% 122.8 58.5% 125.0 49.9% 57.2 39.1% 40.7Organic Subtotal 506.3 38.3% 56.7 28.8% 23.3 8.5% 156.2 46.6% 122.8 58.5% 125.0 49.9% 57.2 39.1% 40.7Other waste

Hazardous waste 5.7 0.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 2.4 0.7% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 20.5 Hazardous waste - mercury 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.2Textiles 23.0 1.7% 12.8 6.5% 17.0 6.2% 26.7 8.0% 1.2 0.6% 2.4 1.0% 9.6 6.6% 2.3Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Electronics and small appliances 6.5 0.5% 8.4 4.3% 0.0 0.0% 5.0 1.5% 4.0 1.9% 1.8 0.7% 0.8 0.5% 0.0Tires 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Construction waste 229.8 17.4% 4.2 2.1% 7.0 2.6% 1.2 0.4% 0.0 0.0% 6.0 2.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.5All other waste 252.3 19.1% 43.3 22.0% 143.3 52.4% 21.2 6.3% 16.4 7.8% 24.6 9.8% 11.8 8.1% 27.0Other Waste Subtotal 517.3 39.2% 68.7 34.9% 167.3 61.2% 56.5 16.8% 21.6 10.3% 34.8 13.9% 22.2 15.2% 50.5Total 1320.2 100.0% 196.7 100.0% 273.5 100.0% 335.3 100.0% 209.8 100.0% 250.4 100.0% 146.4 100.0% 168.7


*=weights adjusted by 30% for moisture

Category

PaperNewspaper and inserts *

Corrugated and kraft bags *

Mixed paper *

Dirty Paper *

Books

Magazine and coated paper

Boxboard

Waxed/film boxboard

Paper Subtotal

Plastic

Plastic bottles

Plastic bottles-deposit

Plastic clamshells

Plastic tubs

Plastic film

All other plastic

Plastic Subtotal

Metal

Ferrous cans

All other ferrous

Aluminum cans

Aluminum cans - deposit

Metal Subtotal

Glass

Glass bottles and jars

Glass bottles and jars - deposit

Glass Subtotal

Organic material

Leaf and yard waste

All other organic

Organic Subtotal

Other waste

Hazardous waste

Hazardous waste - mercury

Textiles

Bulky waste

Electronics and small appliances

Tires

Construction waste

All other waste

Other Waste Subtotal

Total

N. Center 8/22 Orleans 8/23 N. Center 8/23 Charlestown 8/23 St. Johns 8/24 N. Center 8/24 Newport C. 8/24% Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net

3.1% 5.0 2.4% 1.7 1.5% 6.9 2.8% 3.5 1.9% 9.1 2.8% 8.5 3.1% 16.35.3% 10.0 4.8% 8.6 7.6% 12.5 5.1% 2.9 1.6% 10.0 3.1% 5.8 2.1% 19.70.4% 9.0 4.3% 5.4 4.7% 14.3 5.9% 4.4 2.5% 46.8 14.5% 4.2 1.5% 3.00.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.00.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.01.8% 11.5 5.6% 9.0 7.9% 10.5 4.3% 17.8 9.9% 17.9 5.5% 23.5 8.5% 2.52.7% 7.5 3.6% 9.3 8.2% 13.2 5.4% 5.5 3.1% 13.0 4.0% 12.5 4.5% 5.93.4% 1.9 0.9% 1.0 0.9% 0.0 0.0% 1.5 0.8% 3.7 1.1% 1.8 0.7% 1.2

16.7% 44.9 21.7% 35.0 30.7% 57.3 23.6% 35.6 19.8% 100.5 31.1% 56.4 20.5% 48.7

2.3% 7.7 3.7% 4.0 3.5% 6.5 2.7% 5.0 2.8% 6.9 2.1% 5.3 1.9% 4.40.0% 0.3 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.5 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.00.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.00.1% 0.1 0.0% 0.8 0.7% 4.5 1.9% 0.0 0.0% 3.5 1.1% 1.9 0.7% 1.0

16.0% 4.0 1.9% 1.8 1.6% 12.3 5.1% 5.2 2.9% 11.8 3.7% 5.7 2.1% 5.21.8% 6.8 3.3% 3.8 3.3% 7.0 2.9% 4.8 2.7% 8.0 2.5% 7.0 2.5% 5.5

20.2% 18.9 9.1% 10.4 9.1% 30.3 12.5% 15.5 8.6% 30.2 9.3% 19.9 7.2% 16.1

2.4% 4.0 1.9% 2.5 2.2% 4.0 1.6% 2.5 1.4% 11.0 3.4% 7.5 2.7% 3.50.7% 4.0 1.9% 0.0 0.0% 1.0 0.4% 25.9 14.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.00.6% 0.9 0.4% 1.0 0.9% 1.5 0.6% 1.0 0.6% 1.3 0.4% 2.5 0.9% 0.80.6% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.1% 3.2 1.3% 0.7 0.4% 0.2 0.1% 0.5 0.2% 0.24.3% 8.9 4.3% 3.6 3.2% 9.7 4.0% 30.1 16.8% 12.5 3.9% 10.5 3.8% 4.5

4.7% 8.5 4.1% 1.5 1.3% 12.5 5.1% 3.0 1.7% 12.5 3.9% 20.0 7.3% 8.30.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 7.0 2.9% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.14.7% 8.5 4.1% 1.5 1.3% 19.5 8.0% 3.0 1.7% 12.5 3.9% 20.0 7.3% 8.4

0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 13.5 4.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.024.1% 84.7 41.0% 53.5 47.0% 69.0 28.4% 72.5 40.3% 117.0 36.2% 130.2 47.3% 94.324.1% 84.7 41.0% 53.5 47.0% 69.0 28.4% 72.5 40.3% 130.5 40.4% 130.2 47.3% 94.3

12.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.00.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.01.4% 7.0 3.4% 1.3 1.1% 1.0 0.4% 15.8 8.8% 2.2 0.7% 20.0 7.3% 6.80.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 8.5 3.5% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.00.0% 11.3 5.5% 0.7 0.6% 0.8 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 5.8 1.8% 2.0 0.7% 0.00.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.00.3% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 15.2 6.3% 0.0 0.0% 14.0 4.3% 0.0 0.0% 2.2

16.0% 22.5 10.9% 7.9 6.9% 31.9 13.1% 7.2 4.0% 15.0 4.6% 16.4 6.0% 13.229.9% 40.8 19.7% 9.9 8.7% 57.4 23.6% 23.0 12.8% 37.0 11.4% 38.4 13.9% 22.2

100.0% 206.7 100.0% 113.9 100.0% 243.2 100.0% 179.7 100.0% 323.2 100.0% 275.4 100.0% 194.2


*=weights adjusted by 30% for moisture

Category

PaperNewspaper and inserts *

Corrugated and kraft bags *

Mixed paper *

Dirty Paper *

Books

Magazine and coated paper

Boxboard

Waxed/film boxboard

Paper Subtotal

Plastic

Plastic bottles

Plastic bottles-deposit

Plastic clamshells

Plastic tubs

Plastic film

All other plastic

Plastic Subtotal

Metal

Ferrous cans

All other ferrous

Aluminum cans


Metal Subtotal

Glass



Glass Subtotal

Organic material

Leaf and yard waste

All other organic

Organic Subtotal

Other waste

Hazardous waste

Hazardous waste - mercury

Textiles

Bulky waste

Electronics and small appliances

Tires

Construction waste

All other waste


Total

Newport

% Total Net Total %

8.4% 117.7 2.7%10.2% 169.8 3.8%

1.6% 190.1 4.3%0.0% 0.0 0.0%0.0% 0.0 0.0%1.3% 159.3 3.6%3.0% 135.6 3.1%0.6% 37.6 0.8%

25.1% 810.0 18.3%

2.3% 97.8 2.2%0.0% 7.1 0.2%0.0% 0.0 0.0%0.5% 18.8 0.4%2.7% 119.2 2.7%2.8% 123.8 2.8%8.3% 366.7 8.3%

1.8% 79.6 1.8%0.0% 89.4 2.0%0.4% 23.5 0.5%0.1% 9.9 0.2%2.3% 202.4 4.6%

4.3% 150.2 3.4%0.1% 17.4 0.4%4.3% 167.6 3.8%

0.0% 13.5 0.3%48.6% 1709.4 38.5%48.6% 1722.9 38.8%

0.0% 28.6 0.6%0.0% 0.2 0.0%3.5% 149.1 3.4%0.0% 8.5 0.2%0.0% 47.1 1.1%0.0% 0.0 0.0%1.1% 280.1 6.3%6.8% 654.0 14.7%

11.4% 1167.6 26.3%100.0% 4437.1 100.0%

WSI August 27-31, 2001 Residential Waste

8/27 Burlington 8/27 Essex 8/27 E. Center 8/28 Milton 8/28 Burlington 8/28 Westford 8/29 Essex 8/29 Burlington

Category Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net %Paper Newspaper and inserts (1) 1.3 0.5% 3.8 0.9% 9.9 5.9% 5.3 2.2% 4.8 2.3% 4.8 2.0% 9.4 3.5% 6.9 6.0%Corrugated and kraft bags (1) 6.9 2.6% 9.9 2.4% 6.0 3.6% 4.5 1.9% 6.4 3.1% 9.4 4.0% 2.5 0.9% 4.4 3.9%Mixed paper (1) 25.1 9.6% 12.0 2.9% 6.0 3.6% 7.2 3.0% 18.9 9.0% 7.8 3.3% 13.9 5.2% 5.9 5.2%Dirty Paper (1) 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazine and coated paper 4.0 1.5% 17.0 4.1% 11.8 7.0% 3.2 1.3% 6.3 3.0% 2.4 1.0% 5.9 2.2% 6.0 5.3%Books 8.1 3.1% 1.6 0.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Boxboard 2.0 0.8% 5.7 1.4% 4.9 2.9% 8.2 3.4% 6.0 2.8% 7.5 3.2% 7.2 2.7% 1.9 1.7% Waxed/film boxboard 0.4 0.2% 1.6 0.4% 4.2 2.5% 3.2 1.3% 6.4 3.0% 7.3 3.1% 2.4 0.9% 2.8 2.5%Paper Subtotal 47.8 18.2% 51.6 12.6% 42.9 25.6% 31.6 13.1% 48.8 23.1% 39.2 16.6% 41.3 15.6% 27.9 24.5%PlasticPlastic bottles 2.8 1.1% 5.6 1.4% 1.9 1.1% 2.8 1.2% 1.1 0.5% 5.4 2.3% 3.9 1.5% 1.6 1.4% Plastic bottles-deposit 0.2 0.1% 5.4 1.3% 0.1 0.1% 1.2 0.5% 0.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic Clamshells 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic tubs 0.8 0.3% 2.3 0.6% 1.4 0.8% 2.2 0.9% 1.6 0.8% 1.4 0.6% 0.6 0.2% 0.8 0.7%Plastic film 5.4 2.1% 5.0 1.2% 5.2 3.1% 7.0 2.9% 11.3 5.4% 8.2 3.5% 6.3 2.4% 3.5 3.1%All other plastic 16.8 6.4% 16.6 4.0% 7.1 4.2% 16.3 6.8% 9.2 4.4% 13.5 5.7% 3.4 1.3% 2.4 2.1%Plastic Subtotal 26.0 9.9% 34.9 8.5% 15.7 9.4% 29.5 12.3% 23.3 11.0% 28.5 12.1% 14.3 5.4% 8.3 7.3%MetalFerrous cans 4.6 1.8% 1.2 0.3% 1.0 0.6% 2.6 1.1% 4.4 2.1% 3.4 1.4% 3.0 1.1% 1.0 0.9%All other ferrous 14.9 5.7% 0.2 0.0% 13.6 8.1% 2.2 0.9% 1.4 0.7% 7.6 3.2% 1.8 0.7% 1.4 1.2%Aluminum cans 0.7 0.3% 0.5 0.1% 1.0 0.6% 1.5 0.6% 3.1 1.5% 0.8 0.3% 1.9 0.7% 0.5 0.4% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.6 0.3% 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.1%Metal Subtotal 20.3 7.8% 2.0 0.5% 15.6 9.3% 6.4 2.7% 9.0 4.3% 12.4 5.3% 6.8 2.6% 3.0 2.6%Glass Glass bottles and jars 2.2 0.8% 8.2 2.0% 3.2 1.9% 6.2 2.6% 3.2 1.5% 1.0 0.4% 2.4 0.9% 2.2 1.9% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Glass Subtotal 2.2 0.8% 8.2 2.0% 3.2 1.9% 6.2 2.6% 3.2 1.5% 1.0 0.4% 2.4 0.9% 2.2 1.9%Organic MaterialLeaf and yard waste 0.0 0.0% 5.4 1.3% 0.2 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 11.0 5.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.4 0.2% 1.2 1.1%All other organic 60.2 23.0% 211.7 51.6% 50.0 29.9% 83.8 34.8% 70.6 33.4% 70.6 30.0% 147.4 55.5% 57.4 50.6%Subtotal Organic 60.2 23.0% 217.1 52.9% 50.2 30.0% 83.8 34.8% 81.6 38.7% 70.6 30.0% 147.8 55.6% 58.6 51.6%Other WasteHazardous waste 22.6 8.6% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.6 0.7% 0.0 0.0% 0.6 0.3% 0.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0% Hazardous waste - mercury 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 12.0 4.6% 0.2 0.0% 9.2 5.5% 30.0 12.5% 8.0 3.8% 6.6 2.8% 25.6 9.6% 0.2 0.2%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 61.2 14.9% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Electronics and small appliances 0.8 0.3% 0.6 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Tires 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 4.6 1.8% 10.4 2.5% 2.6 1.6% 0.0 0.0% 3.2 1.5% 9.4 4.0% 0.0 0.0% 5.6 4.9%All other waste 65.2 24.9% 24.2 5.9% 28.0 16.7% 51.4 21.4% 34.0 16.1% 67.2 28.5% 27.4 10.3% 7.8 6.9%Other Waste Subtotal 105.2 40.2% 96.6 23.5% 39.8 23.8% 83.0 34.5% 45.2 21.4% 84.0 35.6% 53.1 20.0% 13.6 12.0%Total 261.7 100.0% 410.4 100.0% 167.4 100.0% 240.5 100.0% 211.1 100.0% 235.7 100.0% 265.7 100.0% 113.6 100.0%

(1) Weights adjusted for moisture (30%)


CategoryPaper Newspaper and inserts (1)Corrugated and kraft bags (1)Mixed paper (1)Dirty Paper (1)Magazine and coated paperBooksBoxboard Waxed/film boxboard Paper SubtotalPlasticPlastic bottles Plastic bottles-depositPlastic ClamshellsPlastic tubsPlastic filmAll other plastic Plastic SubtotalMetalFerrous cansAll other ferrousAluminum cans Aluminum cans - depositMetal SubtotalGlass Glass bottles and jars Glass bottles and jars - depositGlass SubtotalOrganic MaterialLeaf and yard wasteAll other organicSubtotal OrganicOther WasteHazardous waste Hazardous waste - mercury TextilesBulky wasteElectronics and small appliancesTiresConstruction wasteAll other wasteOther Waste SubtotalTotal


8/29 Essex 8/30 Colchester 8/30 Hines, Will 8/30 S. Burl 8/31 Underhill 8/31 Underhill 8/31 Richmond

Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Total Net

8.0 5.2% 3.9 2.0% 4.2 2.3% 3.2 2.1% 3.1 2.2% 3.8 1.6% 2.2 1.4% 74.53.9 2.6% 5.8 2.9% 6.7 3.7% 3.2 2.1% 4.9 3.5% 3.1 1.3% 6.2 3.8% 83.83.9 2.6% 2.7 1.4% 0.8 0.5% 9.2 6.1% 7.9 5.6% 16.8 6.9% 5.2 3.2% 143.60.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.02.6 1.7% 2.8 1.4% 3.4 1.9% 10.4 6.8% 8.5 6.0% 23.6 9.8% 4.0 2.4% 111.90.0 0.0% 5.6 2.8% 1.5 0.8% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 16.84.3 2.8% 1.0 0.5% 9.8 5.4% 3.8 2.5% 3.2 2.3% 4.4 1.8% 2.8 1.7% 72.73.1 2.0% 2.0 1.0% 20.8 11.5% 3.5 2.3% 1.4 1.0% 8.7 3.6% 2.3 1.4% 70.1

25.8 17.0% 23.9 11.9% 47.3 26.1% 33.4 21.9% 29.0 20.5% 60.4 24.9% 22.7 13.9% 573.3

1.4 0.9% 3.3 1.6% 2.0 1.1% 2.3 1.5% 3.2 2.3% 3.6 1.5% 2.4 1.5% 43.30.0 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.6 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 8.00.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.01.0 0.7% 0.1 0.0% 1.4 0.8% 0.9 0.6% 0.6 0.4% 2.0 0.8% 1.4 0.9% 18.5

11.1 7.3% 1.8 0.9% 5.4 3.0% 6.0 3.9% 5.0 3.5% 7.0 2.9% 9.6 5.9% 97.810.4 6.8% 8.1 4.0% 12.5 6.9% 14.6 9.6% 8.0 5.7% 8.8 3.6% 5.2 3.2% 152.923.9 15.7% 13.4 6.7% 21.4 11.8% 23.9 15.7% 16.8 11.9% 22.0 9.1% 18.6 11.4% 320.5

0.2 0.1% 4.4 2.2% 2.8 1.5% 2.0 1.3% 2.8 2.0% 2.2 0.9% 0.8 0.5% 36.45.6 3.7% 6.4 3.2% 2.2 1.2% 5.8 3.8% 18.4 13.0% 0.6 0.2% 4.0 2.4% 86.10.1 0.1% 0.8 0.4% 1.8 1.0% 0.8 0.5% 0.5 0.4% 1.0 0.4% 1.0 0.6% 16.00.0 0.0% 0.2 0.1% 0.1 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.1% 1.2 0.5% 0.0 0.0% 2.85.9 3.9% 11.8 5.9% 6.9 3.8% 8.6 5.6% 21.8 15.4% 5.0 2.1% 5.8 3.6% 141.3

2.4 1.6% 4.1 2.0% 7.0 3.9% 2.8 1.8% 0.6 0.4% 3.4 1.4% 1.4 0.9% 50.30.0 0.0% 0.5 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.72.4 1.6% 4.6 2.3% 7.0 3.9% 2.8 1.8% 0.6 0.4% 3.6 1.5% 1.4 0.9% 51.0

8.0 5.3% 23.6 11.8% 13.0 7.2% 0.4 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 63.268.2 44.9% 50.4 25.1% 40.0 22.1% 51.8 33.9% 38.4 27.2% 103.1 42.6% 61.6 37.7% 1165.276.2 50.1% 74.0 36.9% 53.0 29.3% 52.2 34.2% 38.4 27.2% 103.1 42.6% 61.6 37.7% 1228.4

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.8 1.0% 0.4 0.3% 0.4 0.3% 1.8 0.7% 0.0 0.0% 29.30.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.15.2 3.4% 5.8 2.9% 17.8 9.8% 3.7 2.4% 1.7 1.2% 5.8 2.4% 6.6 4.0% 138.40.0 0.0% 7.4 3.7% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 13.7 8.4% 82.30.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.6 0.9% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 11.2 4.6% 1.8 1.1% 16.20.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.00.2 0.1% 13.4 6.7% 3.4 1.9% 0.6 0.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.6 0.2% 2.2 1.3% 56.2

12.4 8.2% 46.2 23.0% 20.8 11.5% 27.0 17.7% 32.6 23.1% 28.4 11.7% 29.0 17.8% 501.617.8 11.7% 72.8 36.3% 45.4 25.1% 31.7 20.8% 34.7 24.6% 47.9 19.8% 53.3 32.6% 824.1

152.0 100.0% 200.5 100.0% 180.9 100.0% 152.6 100.0% 141.3 100.0% 242.0 100.0% 163.4 100.0% 3138.6


CategoryPaper Newspaper and inserts (1)Corrugated and kraft bags (1)Mixed paper (1)Dirty Paper (1)Magazine and coated paperBooksBoxboard Waxed/film boxboard Paper SubtotalPlasticPlastic bottles Plastic bottles-depositPlastic ClamshellsPlastic tubsPlastic filmAll other plastic Plastic SubtotalMetalFerrous cansAll other ferrousAluminum cans Aluminum cans - depositMetal SubtotalGlass Glass bottles and jars Glass bottles and jars - depositGlass SubtotalOrganic MaterialLeaf and yard wasteAll other organicSubtotal OrganicOther WasteHazardous waste Hazardous waste - mercury TextilesBulky wasteElectronics and small appliancesTiresConstruction wasteAll other wasteOther Waste SubtotalTotal


Total %

2.4%2.7%4.6%0.0%3.6%0.5%2.3%2.2%

18.3%

1.4%0.3%0.0%0.6%3.1%4.9%

10.2%

1.2%2.7%0.5%0.1%4.5%

1.6%0.0%1.6%

2.0%37.1%39.1%

0.9%0.0%4.4%2.6%0.5%0.0%1.8%

16.0%26.3%

100.0%

WSI November 5-8, 2001 Residential WasteLoad 1 11/05 Load 2 11/05 Load 3 11/05 Load 1 11/06 Load 2 11/06 Load 3 11/06 Load 1 11/07

Category Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net %PaperNewspaper and inserts 8.8 5.1% 4.2 1.5% 6.2 2.7% 10.1 2.2% 16.5 6.0% 16.0 8.1% 1.2 0.2%Corrugated and kraft bags 6.6 3.9% 6.2 2.2% 19.5 8.4% 21.0 4.6% 17.0 6.2% 11.3 5.7% 53.0 10.6%Mixed paper 19.2 11.2% 13.7 4.8% 11.1 4.8% 7.9 1.7% 5.2 1.9% 11.4 5.8% 7.8 1.6%Dirty Paper 7.8 4.6% 31.2 10.9% 12.4 5.3% 79.0 17.1% 17.4 6.4% 14.2 7.2% 40.2 8.1%Books 0.4 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 31.2 13.4% 0.0 0.0% 5.8 2.1% 0.0 0.0% 14.9 3.0%Magazine and coated pap 2.3 1.3% 2.4 0.8% 2.0 0.9% 5.0 1.1% 5.0 1.8% 9.1 4.6% 8.2 1.6%Boxboard 2.9 1.7% 4.7 1.6% 11.9 5.1% 7.0 1.5% 5.1 1.9% 4.6 2.3% 1.6 0.3% Waxed/film boxboard 4.8 2.8% 7.8 2.7% 5.2 2.2% 11.4 2.5% 4.3 1.6% 3.8 1.9% 27.2 5.5%Paper Subtotal 52.8 30.8% 70.2 24.6% 99.5 42.6% 141.4 30.7% 76.3 27.9% 70.4 35.7% 154.1 30.9%PlasticPlastic bottles 2.2 1.3% 4.0 1.4% 3.3 1.4% 4.0 0.9% 1.9 0.7% 1.6 0.8% 2.5 0.5% Plastic bottles-deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.1% 0.1 0.0% 0.2 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.0%Plastic clamshells 2.0 1.2% 3.0 1.0% 0.6 0.3% 2.3 0.5% 1.8 0.7% 2.0 1.0% 7.4 1.5%Plastic tubs 0.6 0.4% 0.4 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 1.4 0.3% 0.2 0.1% 0.6 0.3% 0.1 0.0%Plastic film 4.0 2.3% 11.4 4.0% 3.4 1.5% 20.0 4.3% 7.5 2.7% 11.4 5.8% 9.2 1.8%All other plastic 1.2 0.7% 9.6 3.4% 16.0 6.9% 6.0 1.3% 4.6 1.7% 10.2 5.2% 40.1 8.1%Plastic Subtotal 10.0 5.8% 28.6 10.0% 23.4 10.0% 33.9 7.3% 16.1 5.9% 25.8 13.1% 59.4 11.9%MetalsFerrous cans 1.2 0.7% 2.8 1.0% 16.6 7.1% 6.0 1.3% 1.2 0.4% 1.6 0.8% 3.6 0.7%All other ferrous 1.4 0.8% 0.8 0.3% 9.6 4.1% 8.0 1.7% 0.6 0.2% 1.6 0.8% 35.2 7.1%Aluminum cans 0.9 0.5% 0.3 0.1% 0.2 0.1% 1.2 0.3% 1.3 0.5% 0.5 0.3% 0.5 0.1% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1 0.1% 0.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.0% 0.3 0.1% 0.1 0.1% 0.1 0.0%Metal Subtotal 3.6 2.1% 4.0 1.4% 26.4 11.3% 15.4 3.3% 3.4 1.2% 3.8 1.9% 39.4 7.9%GlassGlass bottles and jars 7.2 4.2% 2.2 0.8% 4.2 1.8% 21.2 4.6% 5.6 2.0% 5.4 2.7% 2.2 0.4% Glass bottles - deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.0 0.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Glass Subtotal 7.2 4.2% 2.2 0.8% 4.2 1.8% 21.2 4.6% 6.6 2.4% 5.4 2.7% 2.2 0.4%Organic MaterialLeaf and yard waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other organic 33.4 19.5% 61.8 21.6% 5.4 2.3% 79.8 17.3% 76.0 27.8% 42.0 21.3% 11.0 2.2%Organic Subtotal 33.4 19.5% 61.8 21.6% 5.4 2.3% 79.8 17.3% 76.0 27.8% 42.0 21.3% 11.0 2.2%Other WasteHazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 1.0 0.3% 14.0 6.0% 0.6 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.6 0.3% 0.0 0.0% Hazardous mercury 0.4 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 6.2 3.6% 10.8 3.8% 10.4 4.5% 14.0 3.0% 18.8 6.9% 1.0 0.5% 35.0 7.0%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Electronics 0.0 0.0% 21.4 7.5% 2.0 0.9% 4.8 1.0% 0.6 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 15.8 3.2%Tires 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 1.0 0.6% 4.0 1.4% 1.0 0.4% 23.6 5.1% 61.6 22.5% 0.0 0.0% 49.4 9.9%All other waste 56.8 33.1% 81.8 28.6% 47.2 20.2% 126.6 27.4% 13.8 5.1% 48.4 24.5% 131.6 26.4%Other Waste Subtotal 64.4 37.6% 119.0 41.6% 74.6 31.9% 169.6 36.8% 94.8 34.7% 50.0 25.3% 231.8 46.6%Total 171.4 100.0% 285.8 100.0% 233.5 100.0% 461.3 100.0% 273.2 100.0% 197.4 100.0% 497.9 100.0%

WSI November 5-8, 2001 Residential Waste

CategoryPaperNewspaper and insertsCorrugated and kraft bagsMixed paperDirty PaperBooksMagazine and coated papBoxboard Waxed/film boxboard Paper SubtotalPlasticPlastic bottles Plastic bottles-depositPlastic clamshellsPlastic tubsPlastic filmAll other plasticPlastic SubtotalMetalsFerrous cansAll other ferrousAluminum cans Aluminum cans - depositMetal SubtotalGlassGlass bottles and jars Glass bottles - depositGlass SubtotalOrganic MaterialLeaf and yard wasteAll other organicOrganic SubtotalOther WasteHazardous waste Hazardous mercury TextilesBulky wasteElectronicsTiresConstruction wasteAll other wasteOther Waste SubtotalTotal

Load 2 11/07 Load 3 11/07 Load 4 11/07 Load 1 11/08 Load 2 11/08Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Total Net Total %

3.5 2.0% 2.9 1.9% 6.7 2.0% 23.0 6.6% 1.8 0.6% 100.9 2.9%5.0 2.9% 32.3 21.6% 3.4 1.0% 19.0 5.4% 12.8 4.1% 207.1 6.0%

18.3 10.6% 10.8 7.2% 6.0 1.8% 16.0 4.6% 6.2 2.0% 133.6 3.9%19.4 11.2% 12.4 8.3% 41.8 12.3% 28.4 8.1% 22.0 7.0% 326.2 9.5%

8.6 5.0% 0.0 0.0% 4.2 1.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 65.1 1.9%3.6 2.1% 5.2 3.5% 0.9 0.3% 8.0 2.3% 3.7 1.2% 55.4 1.6%1.8 1.0% 1.0 0.7% 8.4 2.5% 7.2 2.1% 3.8 1.2% 60.0 1.7%3.4 2.0% 3.8 2.5% 4.8 1.4% 6.6 1.9% 5.2 1.7% 88.3 2.6%

63.6 36.8% 68.4 45.7% 76.2 22.4% 108.2 31.0% 55.5 17.7% 1036.6 30.1%

0.9 0.5% 0.2 0.1% 2.8 0.8% 2.7 0.8% 4.9 1.6% 31.0 0.9%0.1 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.6 0.2% 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 1.6 0.0%1.9 1.1% 1.4 0.9% 1.6 0.5% 1.6 0.5% 0.8 0.3% 26.4 0.8%0.6 0.3% 0.1 0.1% 1.6 0.5% 1.6 0.5% 0.5 0.2% 7.7 0.2%8.4 4.9% 4.9 3.3% 12.4 3.6% 7.4 2.1% 8.6 2.8% 108.6 3.2%6.9 4.0% 4.2 2.8% 7.6 2.2% 11.2 3.2% 6.2 2.0% 123.8 3.6%

18.8 10.9% 10.8 7.2% 26.6 7.8% 24.6 7.0% 21.1 6.7% 299.1 8.7%

0.4 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 1.2 0.4% 2.8 0.8% 4.6 1.5% 42.0 1.2%11.6 6.7% 11.2 7.5% 8.6 2.5% 4.6 1.3% 7.3 2.3% 100.5 2.9%

0.5 0.3% 0.4 0.3% 0.7 0.2% 1.5 0.4% 2.8 0.9% 10.8 0.3%0.1 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.2 0.1% 1.4 0.0%

12.6 7.3% 11.6 7.8% 10.6 3.1% 9.0 2.6% 14.9 4.8% 154.7 4.5%

1.4 0.8% 1.6 1.1% 1.4 0.4% 17.8 5.1% 18.8 6.0% 89.0 2.6%0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 9.6 2.7% 0.0 0.0% 10.6 0.3%1.4 0.8% 1.6 1.1% 1.4 0.4% 27.4 7.8% 18.8 6.0% 99.6 2.9%

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 10.2 3.3% 10.2 0.3%36.8 21.3% 19.2 12.8% 68.8 20.2% 70.2 20.1% 82.4 26.4% 586.8 17.0%36.8 21.3% 19.2 12.8% 68.8 20.2% 70.2 20.1% 92.6 29.6% 597.0 17.3%

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 6.0 1.7% 0.0 0.0% 22.2 0.6%0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.4 0.0%6.8 3.9% 12.4 8.3% 5.8 1.7% 63.8 18.3% 9.6 3.1% 194.6 5.6%0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%

11.8 6.8% 0.0 0.0% 83.9 24.7% 3.2 0.9% 0.0 0.0% 143.5 4.2%0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%2.0 1.2% 14.6 9.8% 16.0 4.7% 0.0 0.0% 42.2 13.5% 215.4 6.3%

19.2 11.1% 11.0 7.4% 50.6 14.9% 37.0 10.6% 58.0 18.5% 682.0 19.8%39.8 23.0% 38.0 25.4% 156.3 46.0% 110.0 31.5% 109.8 35.1% 1258.1 36.5%

173.0 100.0% 149.6 100.0% 339.9 100.0% 349.4 100.0% 312.7 100.0% 3445.1 100.0%

WASTE USA November 19-21, 2001 ResidentialLoad 1 11/19 Load 2 11/19 Load 3 11/19 Load 1 11/20 Load 2 11/20 Load 1 11/21 Load 2 11/21 Load 3

Category Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % NetPaperNewspaper and inserts 8.2 3.2% 3.0 1.6% 5.7 2.4% 0.0 0.0% 16.0 4.4% 9.0 5.2% 10.1 4.0% 3.2Corrugated and kraft bags 7.8 3.1% 17.1 9.1% 19.3 8.1% 22.4 13.0% 6.0 1.7% 8.6 5.0% 11.8 4.7% 4.8Mixed paper 4.8 1.9% 3.4 1.8% 7.4 3.1% 6.6 3.8% 17.6 4.9% 19.4 11.3% 31.2 12.4% 6.7Dirty Paper 7.4 2.9% 27.6 14.7% 20.0 8.4% 0.0 0.0% 27.3 7.5% 20.3 11.8% 23.9 9.5% 20.6Books 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 2.4 1.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Magazine and coated paper 1.4 0.5% 12.6 6.7% 12.8 5.4% 0.0 0.0% 2.7 0.7% 8.5 4.9% 9.2 3.7% 0.4Boxboard 7.6 3.0% 8.9 4.7% 6.4 2.7% 2.4 1.4% 7.4 2.0% 8.6 5.0% 8.9 3.6% 4.8 Waxed/film boxboard 10.5 4.1% 3.4 1.8% 9.2 3.9% 0.0 0.0% 8.4 2.3% 4.4 2.6% 5.0 2.0% 5.6Paper Subtotal 47.7 18.7% 76.0 40.5% 80.8 33.9% 33.8 19.6% 85.4 23.6% 78.8 45.9% 100.1 39.9% 46.1PlasticPlastic bottles 3.6 1.4% 7.3 3.9% 5.8 2.4% 0.1 0.1% 12.2 3.4% 3.4 2.0% 6.6 2.6% 4.8 Plastic bottles-deposit 0.2 0.1% 0.1 0.1% 0.2 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Plastic clamshells 2.8 1.1% 2.4 1.3% 0.8 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 1.8 0.5% 1.6 0.9% 1.3 0.5% 2.4Plastic tubs 0.6 0.2% 0.5 0.3% 0.2 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 1.6 0.4% 0.6 0.3% 1.2 0.5% 1.0Plastic film 4.6 1.8% 7.2 3.8% 5.8 2.4% 0.4 0.2% 7.6 2.1% 5.2 3.0% 5.8 2.3% 14.0All other plastic 5.0 2.0% 3.0 1.6% 5.9 2.5% 12.1 7.0% 11.9 3.3% 5.2 3.0% 7.6 3.0% 9.0Plastic Subtotal 16.8 6.6% 20.5 10.9% 18.7 7.8% 12.6 7.3% 35.3 9.7% 16.0 9.3% 22.5 9.0% 31.2MetalFerrous cans 3.8 1.5% 7.0 3.7% 5.2 2.2% 0.0 0.0% 10.0 2.8% 3.2 1.9% 4.1 1.6% 5.4All other ferrous 2.4 0.9% 0.4 0.2% 4.4 1.8% 22.6 13.1% 6.2 1.7% 0.0 0.0% 1.4 0.6% 2.8Aluminum cans 0.9 0.4% 16.8 9.0% 0.8 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 1.4 0.4% 1.0 0.6% 1.2 0.5% 1.5 Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1 0.0% 0.8 0.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.1% 0.4 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.1Metal Subtotal 7.2 2.8% 25.0 13.3% 10.4 4.4% 22.7 13.2% 18.0 5.0% 4.2 2.4% 6.7 2.7% 9.8GlassGlass bottles and jars 3.0 1.2% 0.0 0.0% 4.0 1.7% 0.0 0.0% 13.6 3.8% 5.2 3.0% 4.6 1.8% 8.6 Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 2.0 1.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Glass Subtotal 3.0 1.2% 0.0 0.0% 4.0 1.7% 0.0 0.0% 13.6 3.8% 7.2 4.2% 4.6 1.8% 8.6Organic MaterialLeaf and yard waste 1.0 0.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0All other organic 92.2 36.1% 45.0 24.0% 75.6 31.7% 0.0 0.0% 115.2 31.8% 32.0 18.6% 60.4 24.1% 42.0Organic Subtotal 93.2 36.4% 45.0 24.0% 75.6 31.7% 0.0 0.0% 115.2 31.8% 32.0 18.6% 60.4 24.1% 42.0Other Waste Hazardous waste 0.8 0.3% 0.4 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.6 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 Hazardous waste - mercury 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Textiles 11.2 4.4% 2.4 1.3% 21.2 8.9% 63.8 37.0% 20.8 5.7% 15.6 9.1% 1.8 0.7% 6.4Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 23.7 13.8% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 30.0Electronics 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 3.4 2.0% 4.6 1.3% 0.0 0.0% 8.0 3.2% 0.0Tires 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0Construction waste 1.4 0.5% 2.0 1.1% 2.0 0.8% 0.0 0.0% 6.6 1.8% 10.4 6.1% 31.8 12.7% 0.0All other waste 74.4 29.1% 16.0 8.5% 25.8 10.8% 12.2 7.1% 62.6 17.3% 7.0 4.1% 14.8 5.9% 57.8Other Waste Subtotal 87.8 34.3% 21.0 11.2% 49.0 20.5% 103.1 59.9% 94.6 26.1% 33.6 19.6% 56.4 22.5% 94.2Total 255.7 100.0% 187.5 100.0% 238.5 100.0% 172.2 100.0% 362.1 100.0% 171.8 100.0% 250.7 100.0% 231.9

WASTE USA November 19-21, 2001 Residential

CategoryPaperNewspaper and insertsCorrugated and kraft bagsMixed paperDirty PaperBooksMagazine and coated paperBoxboard Waxed/film boxboard Paper SubtotalPlasticPlastic bottles Plastic bottles-depositPlastic clamshellsPlastic tubsPlastic filmAll other plasticPlastic SubtotalMetalFerrous cansAll other ferrousAluminum cans Aluminum cans - depositMetal SubtotalGlassGlass bottles and jars Glass bottles and jars - depositGlass SubtotalOrganic MaterialLeaf and yard wasteAll other organicOrganic SubtotalOther WasteHazardous waste Hazardous waste - mercury TextilesBulky wasteElectronicsTiresConstruction wasteAll other wasteOther Waste SubtotalTotal

11/21 Load 4 11/21% Net % Total Net Total %

1.4% 1.9 0.7% 57.1 2.7%2.1% 4.2 1.5% 102.0 4.7%2.9% 5.0 1.8% 102.1 4.7%8.9% 24.7 8.8% 171.8 8.0%0.0% 0.0 0.0% 2.4 0.1%0.2% 13.2 4.7% 60.8 2.8%2.1% 1.7 0.6% 56.7 2.6%2.4% 6.2 2.2% 52.7 2.5%

19.9% 56.9 20.4% 605.6 28.2%

2.1% 5.6 2.0% 49.4 2.3%0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.8 0.0%1.0% 1.6 0.6% 14.7 0.7%0.4% 1.2 0.4% 6.9 0.3%6.0% 8.2 2.9% 58.8 2.7%3.9% 18.6 6.7% 78.3 3.6%

13.5% 35.2 12.6% 208.8 9.7%

2.3% 4.2 1.5% 42.9 2.0%1.2% 3.0 1.1% 43.2 2.0%0.6% 1.6 0.6% 25.2 1.2%0.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.5 0.1%4.2% 8.8 3.1% 112.8 5.2%

3.7% 9.0 3.2% 48.0 2.2%0.0% 0.0 0.0% 2.0 0.1%3.7% 9.0 3.2% 50.0 2.3%

0.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.0 0.0%18.1% 87.4 31.3% 549.8 25.6%18.1% 87.4 31.3% 550.8 25.6%

0.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.8 0.1%0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%2.8% 15.4 5.5% 158.6 7.4%

12.9% 0.0 0.0% 53.7 2.5%0.0% 11.0 3.9% 27.2 1.3%0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%0.0% 0.0 0.0% 54.2 2.5%

24.9% 55.8 20.0% 326.4 15.2%40.6% 82.2 29.4% 621.9 28.9%

100.0% 279.5 100.0% 2149.9 100.0%

OFFICE

WSI August 27-31, 2001 Office

8/30 Office 8/29 Williston

Category Net % Net % Total Net Total %Paper

Newspaper and inserts 7.3 3.8% 4.4 4.7% 11.7 4.1%Corrugated and kraft bags 7.2 3.8% 2.3 2.5% 9.5 3.3%White Office Paper 17.2 9.0% 6.4 6.8% 23.6 8.3%Non-white mixed paper 3.2 1.7% 5.9 6.3% 9.1 3.2%Dirty Paper 44.2 23.2% 28.0 29.9% 72.2 25.4%Books 0.0 0.0% 1.4 1.5% 1.4 0.5%Magazines, coated paper 2.2 1.2% 5.8 6.2% 8.0 2.8%Boxboard 1.4 0.7% 1.4 1.5% 2.8 1.0%Coated boxboard 14.4 7.5% 1.4 1.5% 15.8 5.6%Paper Subtotal 97.1 50.9% 57.0 61.0% 154.1 54.2%Plastic

All Plastic bottles 4.2 2.2% 1.0 1.1% 5.2 1.8% Plastic bottles deposit 1.4 0.7% 0.8 0.9% 2.2 0.8%Plastic Film Clean 0.8 0.4% 1.2 1.3% 2.0 0.7%Plastic Film Dirty 4.9 2.6% 3.2 3.4% 8.1 2.8%Plastic clamshells 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other plastic 7.8 4.1% 7.8 8.4% 15.6 5.5%Foam 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic Subtotal 19.1 10.0% 14.0 15.0% 33.1 11.6%Metal

Ferrous cans 5.2 2.7% 1.6 1.7% 6.8 2.4%All other ferrous 0.6 0.3% 2.4 2.6% 3.0 1.1%Aluminum cans and fall containers 0.4 0.2% 1.0 1.1% 1.4 0.5% Aluminum cans - deposit 1.0 0.5% 0.0 0.0% 1.0 0.4%Metal Subtotal 7.2 3.8% 5.0 5.3% 12.2 4.3%Glass Glass bottles and jars 14.4 7.5% 1.8 1.9% 16.2 5.7% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Glass Subtotal 14.4 7.5% 1.8 1.9% 16.2 5.7%Organic MeterialLeaf and yard waste 0.0 0.0% 1.0 1.1% 1.0 0.4%All other organic 45.2 23.7% 7.4 7.9% 52.6 18.5%Organic Material Subtotal 45.2 23.7% 8.4 9.0% 53.6 18.9%Other WasteHazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% Hazardous waste - mercury 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Electronics 0.0 0.0% 1.6 1.7% 1.6 0.6%Construction waste 0.2 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.1%All other waste 7.6 4.0% 5.7 6.0% 13.3 4.7%Other waste Subtotal 7.8 4.1% 7.3 7.7% 15.1 5.3%Total 190.8 100.0% 93.5 100.0% 284.3 100.0%

WSI November 5-8, 2001 Office WasteBurl 11/05 Burl 11/06 Burl 11/08

Category Net % Net % Net % Total Net Total %PaperNewspaper and inserts 13.0 5.1% 5.2 4.7% 5.0 2.1% 23.2 3.9%Corrugated and kraft bags 27.5 10.8% 16.7 15.1% 14.0 6.0% 58.2 9.7%White office paper 3.8 1.5% 12.0 10.8% 27.7 11.8% 43.5 7.3%Non-White office paper 3.8 1.5% 17.8 16.1% 27.6 11.7% 49.2 8.2%Dirty Paper 23.6 9.3% 11.6 10.5% 48.6 20.7% 83.8 14.0%Books 0.0 0.0% 2.8 2.5% 0.0 0.0% 2.8 0.5%Magazine and coated paper 7.1 2.8% 3.3 3.0% 11.8 5.0% 22.2 3.7%Boxboard 2.2 0.9% 2.6 2.3% 11.6 4.9% 16.4 2.7% Waxed/film boxboard 2.4 0.9% 3.2 2.9% 2.8 1.2% 8.4 1.4%Paper Subtotal 83.4 32.9% 75.2 67.8% 149.1 63.4% 307.7 51.3%PlasticPlastic bottles 2.2 0.9% 1.4 1.3% 0.9 0.4% 4.5 0.8% Plastic bottles-deposit 0.2 0.1% 0.8 0.7% 0.1 0.0% 1.1 0.2%Plastic film - clean 1.1 0.4% 6.0 5.4% 1.9 0.8% 9.0 1.5%plastic film - dirty 3.0 1.2% 3.1 2.8% 3.6 1.5% 9.7 1.6%Plastic clamshells 2.4 0.9% 2.0 1.8% 1.4 0.6% 5.8 1.0%All other plastic 3.6 1.4% 6.6 6.0% 11.0 4.7% 21.2 3.5%Foam 1.6 0.6% 0.0 0.0% 1.4 0.6% 3.0 0.5%Plastic Subtotal 14.1 5.6% 19.9 17.9% 20.3 8.6% 54.3 9.1%MetalFerrous cans 1.2 0.5% 0.6 0.5% 1.4 0.6% 3.2 0.5%All other ferrous 1.4 0.6% 0.0 0.0% 19.4 8.2% 20.8 3.5%Aluminum cans 0.8 0.3% 0.1 0.1% 0.6 0.3% 1.5 0.3% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.4 0.2% 0.1 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.5 0.1%Metal Subtotal 3.8 1.5% 0.8 0.7% 21.4 9.1% 26.0 4.3%GlassGlass bottles and jars 2.4 0.9% 1.4 1.3% 1.0 0.4% 4.8 0.8% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Glass Subtotal 2.4 0.9% 1.4 1.3% 1.0 0.4% 4.8 0.8%Organic MaterialLeaf and yard waste 18.1 7.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 18.1 3.0%All other organic 38.6 15.2% 5.2 4.7% 16.8 7.1% 60.6 10.1%Organic Subtotal 56.7 22.4% 5.2 4.7% 16.8 7.1% 78.7 13.1%Other MaterialHazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% Hazardous waste - mercury 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Electronics 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 4.2 1.8% 4.2 0.7%Construction waste 58.6 23.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.4 0.2% 59.0 9.8%All other waste 34.6 13.6% 8.4 7.6% 22.0 9.4% 65.0 10.8%Total Other material 93.2 36.8% 8.4 7.6% 26.6 11.3% 128.2 21.4%Total 253.6 100.0% 110.9 100.0% 235.2 100.0% 599.7 100.0%

WASTE USA November 19-21,2001 Office WasteOffice 11/19

Category Net % Total Net Total %PaperNewspaper and inserts 13.6 2.7% 13.6 2.7%Corrugated and kraft bags 38.6 7.6% 38.6 7.6%White office paper 62.8 12.3% 62.8 12.3%Non-White office paper 57.6 11.3% 57.6 11.3%Dirty Paper 67.8 13.3% 67.8 13.3%Books 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazine and coated paper 29.2 5.7% 29.2 5.7%Boxboard 11.2 2.2% 11.2 2.2% Waxed/film boxboard 9.9 1.9% 9.9 1.9%Paper Subtotal 290.7 57.1% 290.7 57.1%Plastic Plastic bottles 3.6 0.7% 3.6 0.7% Plastic bottles-deposit 0.6 0.1% 0.6 0.1%Plastic film - clean 7.0 1.4% 7.0 1.4%plastic film - dirty 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic clamshells 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Foam 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other plastic 12.6 2.5% 12.6 2.5%Plastic Subtotal 23.8 4.7% 23.8 4.7%Metals Ferrous cans 2.2 0.4% 2.2 0.4%All other ferrous 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.0%Aluminum cans 1.6 0.3% 1.6 0.3% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.6 0.1% 0.6 0.1%Metals Subtotal 4.5 0.9% 4.5 0.9%Glass Glass bottles and jars 11.0 2.2% 11.0 2.2% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Glass Subtotals 11.0 2.2% 11.0 2.2%Organic Materials Leaf and yard waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other organic 131.0 25.7% 131.0 25.7%Organic Subtotal 131.0 25.7% 131.0 25.7%Other Waste Hazardous waste 2.0 0.4% 2.0 0.4% Hazardous waste - mercury 2.7 0.5% 2.7 0.5%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Electronics 2.8 0.6% 2.8 0.6%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other waste 40.4 7.9% 40.4 7.9%Other Waste Subtotals 47.9 9.4% 47.9 9.4%Total 508.9 100.0% 508.9 100.0%

RETAIL

WSI August 27-31, 2001 Retail

8/29 Retail 8/30 RetailCategory Net % Net % Total Net Total %Paper

Newspaper and inserts 0.4 0.5% 4.2 2.1% 4.6 1.6%Corrugated and kraft bags 20.5 23.4% 46.4 23.3% 66.9 23.3%White Office Paper 3.4 3.9% 0.0 0.0% 3.4 1.2%Non-white mixed paper 0.0 0.0% 4.8 2.4% 4.8 1.7%Dirty Paper 0.0 0.0% 11.6 5.8% 11.6 4.0%Books 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazines, coated paper 0.6 0.7% 7.8 3.9% 8.4 2.9%Boxboard 8.7 9.9% 5.0 2.5% 13.7 4.8%Coated boxboard 4.0 4.6% 2.4 1.2% 6.4 2.2%Paper Subtotal 37.6 43.0% 82.2 41.2% 119.8 41.8%PlasticPlastic tubs 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic Containers (not tubs) 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All Plastic bottles 2.8 3.2% 1.6 0.8% 4.4 1.5% Plastic bottles deposit 0.8 0.9% 0.0 0.0% 0.8 0.3%Plastic Film Clean 7.2 8.2% 9.2 4.6% 16.4 5.7%Plastic Film Dirty 7.7 8.8% 2.8 1.4% 10.5 3.7%All other plastic 21.2 24.2% 8.2 4.1% 29.4 10.3%Foam 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic Subtotal 39.7 45.4% 21.8 10.9% 61.5 21.4%Metal

Ferrous cans 0.8 0.9% 1.0 0.5% 1.8 0.6%All other ferrous 0.0 0.0% 4.6 2.3% 4.6 1.6%Aluminum cans and foil 0.7 0.8% 0.5 0.3% 1.2 0.4% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1 0.1% 0.1 0.1% 0.2 0.1%Metal Subtotal 1.6 1.8% 6.2 3.1% 7.8 2.7%Glass Glass bottles and jars 3.0 3.4% 5.2 2.6% 8.2 2.9% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Glass Subtotal 3.0 3.4% 5.2 2.6% 8.2 2.9%Organic MaterialLeaf and yard waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other organic 0.0 0.0% 39.0 19.6% 39.0 13.6%Organic Material Subtotal 0.0 0.0% 39.0 19.6% 39.0 13.6%Other waste

Hazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% Hazardous waste - mercury 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 0.0 0.0% 6.4 3.2% 6.4 2.2%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 3.4 1.7% 3.4 1.2%All other waste 5.6 6.4% 35.1 17.6% 40.7 14.2%Other Waste Subtotal 5.6 6.4% 44.9 22.5% 50.5 17.6%Total 87.5 100.0% 199.3 100.0% 286.8 100.0%

WSI November 5-8, 2001 Retail Waste

Category Mall 11/05 Mixed 11/05 Small 11/07Paper Net % Net % Net % Total Net Total %Newspaper and inserts 0.0 0.0% 3.6 2.3% 6.2 2.6% 9.8 1.7%Corrugated and kraft bags 18.0 9.9% 13.8 8.9% 3.9 1.6% 35.7 6.2%White office paper 0.0 0.0% 7.5 4.9% 15.5 6.5% 23.0 4.0%Non-White office paper 7.8 4.3% 0.0 0.0% 4.0 1.7% 11.8 2.1%Dirty Paper 4.8 2.6% 17.9 11.6% 13.0 5.4% 35.7 6.2%Books 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazine and coated paper 0.8 0.4% 2.0 1.3% 29.3 12.3% 32.1 5.6%Boxboard 2.0 1.1% 1.3 0.8% 0.8 0.3% 4.1 0.7% Waxed/film boxboard 12.9 7.1% 6.0 3.9% 2.8 1.2% 21.7 3.8%Paper Subtotal 46.3 25.4% 52.1 33.8% 75.5 31.6% 173.9 30.2%PlasticPlastic tubs 0.1 0.1% 0.1 0.1% 0.2 0.1% 0.4 0.1%Plastic bottles 1.6 0.9% 3.0 1.9% 1.9 0.8% 6.5 1.1% Plastic bottles-deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.0%Plastic film - clean 33.7 18.5% 2.1 1.4% 1.4 0.6% 37.2 6.5%plastic film - dirty 4.3 2.4% 5.0 3.2% 3.8 1.6% 13.1 2.3%All other plastic 7.8 4.3% 2.0 1.3% 7.6 3.2% 17.4 3.0%Foam 4.4 2.4% 1.2 0.8% 0.0 0.0% 5.6 1.0%Plastic Subtotal 51.9 28.5% 13.4 8.7% 15.0 6.3% 80.3 14.0%MetalFerrous cans 0.2 0.1% 6.4 4.1% 2.6 1.1% 9.2 1.6%All other ferrous 64.2 35.3% 2.2 1.4% 5.0 2.1% 71.4 12.4%Aluminum cans 0.0 0.0% 0.3 0.2% 0.2 0.1% 0.5 0.1% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1 0.1% 0.1 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.0%Metal Subtotal 64.5 35.4% 9.0 5.8% 7.8 3.3% 81.3 14.1%GlassGlass bottles and jars 0.4 0.2% 4.8 3.1% 1.4 0.6% 6.6 1.1% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.4 0.6% 1.4 0.2%Glass Subtotal 0.4 0.2% 4.8 3.1% 2.8 1.2% 8.0 1.4%Organic MaterialLeaf and yard waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other organic 0.0 0.0% 65.4 42.4% 26.6 11.1% 92.0 16.0%Total Organic 0.0 0.0% 65.4 42.4% 26.6 11.1% 92.0 16.0%Other WasteHazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 5.4 2.3% 5.4 0.9% Hazardous waste - mercury 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.6 0.3% 0.6 0.1%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 90.8 38.0% 90.8 15.8%All other waste 19.0 10.4% 9.6 6.2% 14.6 6.1% 43.2 7.5%Other Waste Subtotal 19.0 10.4% 9.6 6.2% 111.4 46.6% 140.0 24.3%Total 182.1 100.0% 154.3 100.0% 239.1 100.0% 575.5 100.0%

WASTE USA November 19-21, 2001 RetailSt. A 11/19 Berlin 11/20

Category Net % Net % Total Net Total %PaperNewspaper and inserts 4.6 3.5% 15.0 13.1% 19.6 8.0%Corrugated and kraft bags 5.4 4.1% 7.8 6.8% 13.2 5.4%White office paper 0.0 0.0% 1.9 1.7% 1.9 0.8%Non-White office paper 2.4 1.8% 0.0 0.0% 2.4 1.0%Dirty Paper 18.7 14.3% 20.0 17.4% 38.7 15.7%Books 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazine and coated paper 1.2 0.9% 0.0 0.0% 1.2 0.5%Boxboard 8.0 6.1% 9.8 8.5% 17.8 7.2% Waxed/film boxboard 2.9 2.2% 2.5 2.2% 5.4 2.2%Paper Subtotal 43.2 32.9% 57.0 49.7% 100.2 40.7%PlasticPlastic tubs 0.1 0.1% 0.2 0.2% 0.3 0.1%Plastic containers (not tubs) 1.8 1.4% 0.5 0.4% 2.3 0.9%Plastic bottles 4.4 3.4% 0.4 0.3% 4.8 2.0% Plastic bottles-deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic film - clean 8.8 6.7% 17.6 15.3% 26.4 10.7%plastic film - dirty 3.1 2.4% 4.6 4.0% 7.7 3.1%All other plastic 6.8 5.2% 16.7 14.6% 23.5 9.6%Foam 2.2 1.7% 0.2 0.2% 2.4 1.0%Plastic Subtotal 27.2 20.7% 40.2 35.0% 67.4 27.4%Metal Ferrous cans 1.6 1.2% 0.0 0.0% 1.6 0.7%All other ferrous 1.4 1.1% 3.2 2.8% 4.6 1.9%Aluminum cans 0.3 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.3 0.1% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1 0.1% 0.1 0.1% 0.2 0.1%Metal Subtotal 3.4 2.6% 3.3 2.9% 6.7 2.7%GlassGlass bottles and jars 2.0 1.5% 0.4 0.3% 2.4 1.0% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.4 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 0.4 0.2%Glass Subtotal 2.4 1.8% 0.4 0.3% 2.8 1.1%Organic MaterialLeaf and yard waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other organic 33.6 25.6% 1.2 1.0% 34.8 14.2%Organic Material Subtotal 33.6 25.6% 1.2 1.0% 34.8 14.2%Other WasteHazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% Hazardous waste - mercury 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 1.0 0.8% 0.0 0.0% 1.0 0.4%Construction waste 6.8 5.2% 0.0 0.0% 6.8 2.8%All other waste 13.6 10.4% 12.6 11.0% 26.2 10.7%Other waste Subtotal 21.4 16.3% 12.6 11.0% 34.0 13.8%Total 131.2 100.0% 114.7 100.0% 245.9 100.0%

RESTAURANTS

WSI August 27-31, 2001 Restaurant

Category 8/27 Burlington 8/29 Burlington Total Net Total %Paper Net % Net %Corrugated and kraft bags 2.8 1.5% 6.6 2.4% 9.4 2.0%Waxed Bags 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Mixed paper 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Dirty Paper 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazines, coated paper 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Newspaper and inserts 5.3 2.8% 0.0 0.0% 5.3 1.1%Boxboard 5.1 2.7% 4.4 1.6% 9.5 2.0%Coated boxboard 1.4 0.7% 23.0 8.4% 24.4 5.3%Paper Subtotal 14.6 7.7% 34.0 12.4% 48.6 10.5%PlasticAll Plastic bottles 3.8 2.0% 3.5 1.3% 7.3 1.6% Plastic bottles deposit 0.0 0.0% 1.2 0.4% 1.2 0.3%Plastic clamshells 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic tubs 3.2 1.7% 0.0 0.0% 3.2 0.7%Plastic Film 23.8 12.5% 10.9 4.0% 34.7 7.5%All other plastic 8.6 4.5% 19.2 7.0% 27.8 6.0%Plastic Subtotal 39.4 20.6% 34.8 12.7% 74.2 16.0%MetalFerrous cans 3.8 2.0% 0.0 0.0% 3.8 0.8%All other metal 0.0 0.0% 3.0 1.1% 3.0 0.6%Aluminum cans and foil containers 0.5 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 0.5 0.1% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1 0.1% 0.6 0.2% 0.7 0.2%Metal Subtotal 4.4 2.3% 3.6 1.3% 8.0 1.7%Glass Glass bottles and jars 2.0 1.0% 5.4 2.0% 7.4 1.6% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0 0.0% 3.0 1.1% 3.0 0.6%Glass Subtotal 2.0 1.0% 8.4 3.1% 10.4 2.2%Organic

Food Waste (1) 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other organic 109.0 57.1% 169.0 61.8% 278.0 59.9%Organic Subtotal 109.0 57.1% 169.0 61.8% 278.0 59.9%Other WasteHazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other waste 21.4 11.2% 23.8 8.7% 45.2 9.7%Other waste Subtotal 21.4 11.2% 23.8 8.7% 45.2 9.7%Total 190.8 100.0% 273.6 100.0% 464.4 100.0%

(1) In August, food waste was not separated from other organic material such as compostable paper.

WSI November 5-8, 2001 Restaurants

Rest. 11/06 Rest. 11/08Category Net % Net % Total Net Total %PaperCorrugated and kraft bags 18.5 6.3% 22.9 4.1% 41.4 4.9%Waxed bags 2.6 0.9% 6.5 1.2% 9.1 1.1%Mixed paper 5.1 1.7% 4.4 0.8% 9.5 1.1%Dirty paper 48.8 16.7% 18.6 3.3% 67.4 7.9%Magazines, catalogues and coated paper1.6 0.5% 23.6 4.2% 25.2 3.0%Newspapers and inserts 0.0 0.0% 4.4 0.8% 4.4 0.5%Coated Boxboard 6.9 2.4% 10.6 1.9% 17.5 2.1%Uncoated Boxboard 1.6 0.5% 2.6 0.5% 4.2 0.5%Paper Subtotal 85.1 29.2% 93.6 16.7% 178.7 20.9%Plastic SubtotalPlastic bottles 2.3 0.8% 4.8 0.9% 7.1 0.8% Plastic bottles deposit 0.1 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.0%Plastic clamshells 0.5 0.2% 3.0 0.5% 3.5 0.4%Plastic tubs 1.0 0.3% 2.8 0.5% 3.8 0.4%Plastic film 14.6 5.0% 17.5 3.1% 32.1 3.8%All other Plastic 6.2 2.1% 6.4 1.1% 12.6 1.5%Plastic Subtotal 24.7 8.5% 34.5 6.1% 59.2 6.9%MetalFerrous cans 1.0 0.3% 3.0 0.5% 4.0 0.5%All other metal 1.0 0.3% 3.0 0.5% 4.0 0.5%Aluminum cans 0.2 0.1% 3.9 0.7% 4.1 0.5% Aluminum cans deposit 0.2 0.1% 0.1 0.0% 0.3 0.0%Metal Subtotal 2.4 0.8% 10.0 1.8% 12.4 1.5%GlassGlass bottles and jars 3.4 1.2% 6.0 1.1% 9.4 1.1% Glass bottles and jars deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Glass Subtotal 3.4 1.2% 6.0 1.1% 9.4 1.1%OrganicFood Waste 0.0 0.0% 368.6 65.7% 368.6 43.2% All other organic 148.2 50.8% 0.0 0.0% 148.2 17.4%Organic Subtotal 148.2 50.8% 368.6 65.7% 516.8 60.6%Other wasteHazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 4.2 1.4% 3.2 0.6% 7.4 0.9%All other waste 23.8 8.2% 45.4 8.1% 69.2 8.1%Other waste Subtotal 28.0 9.6% 48.6 8.7% 76.6 9.0%Total 291.8 100.0% 561.3 100.0% 853.1 100.0%

WASTE USA November 19-21, 2001 Restaurants

Stowe 11/21Category Net % Total Net Total %Paper Corrugated and kraft bags 17.0 5.3% 17.0 5.3%Waxed bags 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Mixed paper 2.0 0.6% 2.0 0.6%Magazines, catalogues and coated paper 2.6 0.8% 2.6 0.8%Newspapers and inserts 6.3 2.0% 6.3 2.0%Coated Boxboard 14.9 4.6% 14.9 4.6%Uncoated Boxboard 7.8 2.4% 7.8 2.4%Paper Subtotal 50.6 15.7% 50.6 15.7%Plastic Plastic bottles 4.2 1.3% 4.2 1.3% Plastic bottles deposit 0.8 0.2% 0.8 0.2%Plastic clamshells 3.2 1.0% 3.2 1.0%Plastic tubs 0.2 0.1% 0.2 0.1%Plastic film 10.4 3.2% 10.4 3.2%All other Plastic 7.0 2.2% 7.0 2.2%Plastic Subtotal 25.8 8.0% 25.8 8.0%Metal Ferrous cans 1.0 0.3% 1.0 0.3%All other metal 0.2 0.1% 0.2 0.1%Aluminum cans 1.2 0.4% 1.2 0.4% Aluminum cans deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Metal Subtotal 2.4 0.7% 2.4 0.7%Glass Glass bottles and jars 4.6 1.4% 4.6 1.4% Glass bottles and jars deposit 1.4 0.4% 1.4 0.4%Glass Subtotal 6.0 1.9% 6.0 1.9%OrganicFood Waste/ all other organic 145.5 45.3% 145.5 45.3%Dirty Paper 64.4 20.0% 64.4 20.0%Organic Subtotal 209.9 65.3% 209.9 65.3%Other Waste Hazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 9.0 2.8% 9.0 2.8%Textiles 1.2 0.4% 1.2 0.4%All other waste 16.6 5.2% 16.6 5.2%Other Waste Subtotal 26.8 8.3% 26.8 8.3%Total 321.5 100.0% 321.5 100.0%

GROCERY

Waste USA August 20-24, 2001 Grocery

8/23 StoweCategory Net % Total Net Total %PaperCorrugated and kraft bags 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Wax occ 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Mixed paper 1.2 0.3% 1.2 0.3%Dirty Paper 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazines, catalogs, coated paper 52.5 14.3% 52.5 14.3%Coated boxboard 15.5 4.2% 15.5 4.2%Boxboard 65.3 17.8% 65.3 17.8%Newspaper and inserts 67.8 18.5% 67.8 18.5%Paper Subtotal 202.3 55.1% 202.3 55.1%PlasticAll Plastic bottles 3.0 0.8% 3.0 0.8% Plastic bottles deposit 0.5 0.1% 0.5 0.1%Plastic clamshells 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic tubs 0.5 0.1% 0.5 0.1%Plastic film 5.0 1.4% 5.0 1.4%All other plastic 11.3 3.1% 11.3 3.1%Plastic Subtotal 20.3 5.5% 20.3 5.5%Metal Ferrous cans 1.0 0.3% 1.0 0.3%All other ferrous 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Aluminum cans and foil containers 3.0 0.8% 3.0 0.8% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.7 0.2% 0.7 0.2%Metal Subtotal 4.7 1.3% 4.7 1.3%Glass Glass bottles and jars 9.7 2.6% 9.7 2.6% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 5.0 1.4% 5.0 1.4%Glass Subtotal 14.7 4.0% 14.7 4.0%OrganicFood Waste (1) 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other organic 124.0 33.8% 124.0 33.8%Organic Subtotal 124.0 33.8% 124.0 33.8%Other wasteBulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%hazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 0.3 0.1% 0.3 0.1%All other waste 1.0 0.3% 1.0 0.3%Other Waste subtotal 1.3 0.4% 1.3 0.4%Total 367.3 100.0% 367.3 100.0%(1) In August, food waste was not seperated from other organic material such as dirty paper

WSI August 27-31, 2001 Grocery

Category 8/28 Grocery Total Net Total %Paper Net %

Newspaper and inserts 14.9 5.9% 14.9 5.9%Waxed occ 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Corrugated and kraft bags 53.5 21.3% 53.5 21.3%Mixed paper 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Dirty Paper 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazines, coated paper 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Boxboard 30.8 12.3% 30.8 12.3%Coated boxboard 4.4 1.8% 4.4 1.8%Paper Subtotal 103.6 41.2% 103.6 41.2%PlasticAll Plastic bottles 0.2 0.1% 0.2 0.1% Plastic bottles deposit 0.2 0.1% 0.2 0.1%Plastic clamshells 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic tubs 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic Film 7.4 2.9% 7.4 2.9%All other plastic 18.1 7.2% 18.1 7.2%Plastic Subtotal 25.9 10.3% 25.9 10.3%MetalFerrous cans 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other ferrous 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Aluminum cans 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.0%Metal Subtotal 0.1 0.0% 0.1 0.0%Glass Glass bottles and jars 1.6 0.6% 1.6 0.6% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Glass Subtotal 1.6 0.6% 1.6 0.6%Organic MaterialFood Waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other organic 119.8 47.7% 119.8 47.7%Organic Subtotal 119.8 47.7% 119.8 47.7%Other WasteBulky Waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Hazardous Waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.1%All other waste 0.2 0.1% 0.0 0.0%Other Waste Subtotal 0.2 0.1% 0.2 0.1%

Total 251.2 100.0% 251.2 100.0%

WSI November 5-8, 2001 Grocery

Category Grocery 11/07 Grocery 11/08Paper Net % Net % Total Net Total %Corrugated and kraft bags 29.6 0.6% 49.6 11.7% 79.2 10.1%Waxed bags 19.0 5.3% 0.0 0.0% 19.0 2.4%Mixed paper 1.2 8.3% 2.5 0.6% 3.7 0.5%Dirty paper 0.0 0.0% 2.1 0.5% 2.1 0.3%Magazines, catalogues and coated paper 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Coated Boxboard 0.2 0.0% 23.2 5.5% 23.4 3.0%Uncoated Boxboard 3.3 0.9% 8.0 1.9% 11.3 1.4%Newspapers and inserts 2.1 0.5% 25.0 5.9% 27.1 3.5%Paper Subtotal 55.4 15.6% 110.4 26.0% 165.8 21.2%PlasticPlastic bottles 1.0 0.3% 2.2 0.5% 3.2 0.4% Plastic bottles deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.4 0.1% 0.4 0.1%Plastic clamshells 5.0 1.4% 6.2 1.5% 11.2 1.4%Plastic tubs 0.4 0.1% 0.2 0.0% 0.6 0.1%Plastic film 12.1 3.4% 13.7 3.2% 25.8 3.3%All other Plastic 14.7 4.1% 8.8 2.1% 23.5 3.0%Plastic subtotal 33.2 9.3% 31.5 7.4% 64.7 8.3%MetalFerrous cans 0.0 0.0% 0.6 0.1% 0.6 0.1%All other metal 9.0 2.5% 2.0 0.5% 11.0 1.4%Aluminum cans 0.3 0.1% 0.2 0.0% 0.5 0.1% Aluminum cans deposit 0.1 0.0% 0.2 0.0% 0.3 0.0%Metal Subtotal 9.4 2.6% 3.0 0.7% 12.4 1.6%Glass Glass bottles and jars 0.0 0.0% 1.6 0.4% 1.6 0.2% Glass bottles and jars deposit 0.3 0.1% 5.6 1.3% 5.9 0.8%Glass Subtotal 0.3 0.1% 7.2 1.7% 7.5 1.0%Organic MaterialFood Waste 242.6 68.0% 264.6 62.3% 507.2 64.9%All other organic 15.8 4.4% 0.0 0.0% 15.8 2.0%Organic Subtotal 258.4 72.4% 264.6 62.3% 523.0 66.9%Other WasteBulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Hazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 0.0 0.0% 1.0 0.2% 1.0 0.1%All other waste 0.0 0.0% 7.0 1.6% 7.0 0.9%Other Waste Subtotal 0.0 0.0% 8.0 1.9% 8.0 1.0%Total 356.7 100.0% 424.7 100.0% 781.4 100.0%

WASTE USA November 19-21, 2001 Grocery

Grocery 11/19 Grocery 11/20Category Net % Net % Total Net Total %Paper Corrugated and kraft bags 36.7 15.9% 29.1 14.1% 65.8 15.1%Waxed bags 19.2 8.3% 0.0 0.0% 19.2 4.4%Mixed paper 1.1 0.5% 2.3 1.1% 3.4 0.8%Dirty paper 13.0 5.6% 0.0 0.0% 13.0 3.0%Magazines, catalogues and coated paper 0.7 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 0.7 0.2%Coated Boxboard 3.6 1.6% 7.8 3.8% 11.4 2.6%Uncoated Boxboard 0.0 0.0% 1.4 0.8% 1.4 0.3%Newspapers and inserts 14.8 6.4% 0.0 0.0% 14.8 3.4%Paper Subtotal 89.1 38.6% 40.6 19.8% 129.7 29.7%Plastic Plastic bottles 2.0 0.9% 4.0 1.9% 6.0 1.4% Plastic bottles deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.2 0.1% 0.2 0.0%Plastic clamshells 2.4 1.0% 0.8 0.4% 3.2 0.7%Plastic tubs 1.2 0.5% 0.6 0.3% 1.8 0.4%Plastic film 12.9 5.6% 15.2 7.4% 28.1 6.4%All other Plastic 3.2 1.4% 8.4 4.1% 11.6 2.7%Plastic Subtotal 21.7 9.4% 29.2 14.2% 50.9 11.6%Metal Ferrous cans 1.8 0.8% 9.0 4.4% 10.8 2.5%All other metal 0.6 0.3% 0.4 0.2% 1.0 0.2%Aluminum cans 0.0 0.0% 1.4 0.7% 1.4 0.3% Aluminum cans deposit 0.1 0.0% 0.2 0.1% 0.3 0.1%Metal Subtotal 2.5 1.1% 11.0 5.4% 13.5 3.1%Glass Glass bottles and jars 0.6 0.3% 7.2 3.5% 7.8 1.8% Glass bottles and jars deposit 0.0 0.0% 4.0 1.9% 4.0 0.9%Glass Subtotal 0.6 0.3% 11.2 5.4% 11.8 2.7%Organic materialFood Waste (1) 78.0 33.8% 0.0 0.0% 78.0 17.8%All other organic (1) 0.0 0.0% 63.6 30.8% 63.6 14.5%Organic Subtotal 78.0 33.8% 63.6 30.8% 141.6 32.4%Other Waste Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 11.2 5.4% 11.2 2.6%Hazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 0.1 0.0% 3.6 1.7% 3.7 0.8%All other waste 39.0 16.9% 35.8 17.4% 74.8 17.1%Other Waste Subtotal 39.1 16.9% 50.6 24.5% 89.7 20.5%Total 231.0 100.0% 206.2 100.0% 437.2 100.0%

(1) Field data sheets recorded as "food Waste" on 11/19 and "all other organic" on 11/20. However, in both cases the material was primarily food waste.

MOTELS/HOTELS

WSI November 5-8, 2001 Motels

Load 4 11/06 Load 3 11/07Category Net % Net % Total Net Total %

PaperNewspaper and inserts 4.6 3.2% 28.3 11.5% 32.9 8.4%Corrugated and kraft bags 5.7 3.9% 7.0 2.9% 12.7 3.2%Mixed paper 9.8 6.7% 11.8 4.8% 21.6 5.5%Dirty Paper 25.5 17.5% 22.6 9.2% 48.1 12.3%Books 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazine and coated pap 1.0 0.7% 29.8 12.2% 30.8 7.9%Boxboard 2.8 1.9% 6.3 2.6% 9.1 2.3% Waxed/film boxboard 3.6 2.5% 4.9 2.0% 8.5 2.2%Paper Subtotal 53.0 36.4% 110.7 45.1% 163.7 41.9%PlasticPlastic bottles 3.8 2.6% 6.0 2.4% 9.8 2.5% Plastic bottles-deposit 0.0 0.0% 1.8 0.7% 1.8 0.5%Plastic clamshells 1.2 0.8% 3.4 1.4% 4.6 1.2%Plastic tubs 0.8 0.5% 0.6 0.2% 1.4 0.4%Plastic film 4.0 2.7% 4.5 1.8% 8.5 2.2%All other plastic 4.5 3.1% 7.3 3.0% 11.8 3.0%Plastic Subtotal 14.3 9.8% 23.6 9.6% 37.9 9.7%Metal Ferrous cans 0.5 0.3% 0.8 0.3% 1.3 0.3%All other ferrous 0.0 0.0% 1.2 0.5% 1.2 0.3%Aluminum cans 0.0 0.0% 1.7 0.7% 1.7 0.4% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.2 0.1% 1.0 0.4% 1.2 0.3%Metal Subtotal 0.7 0.5% 4.7 1.9% 5.4 1.4%Glass Glass bottles and jars 3.4 2.3% 20.2 8.2% 23.6 6.0% Glass bottles - deposit 0.6 0.4% 11.0 4.5% 11.6 3.0%Glass Subtotal 4.0 2.7% 31.2 12.7% 35.2 9.0%Organic Material Leaf and yard waste 1.2 0.8% 0.0 0.0% 1.2 0.3%All other organic 47.6 32.6% 31.0 12.6% 78.6 20.1%Organic Subtotal 48.8 33.5% 31.0 12.6% 79.8 20.4%Other Waste Hazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% Hazardous mercury 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Textiles 1.2 0.8% 21.4 8.7% 22.6 5.8%Bulky waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Electronics 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Tires 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other waste 23.8 16.3% 22.6 9.2% 46.4 11.9%Other Waste Subtotal 25.0 17.1% 44.0 17.9% 69.0 17.6%Total 145.8 100.0% 245.2 100.0% 391.0 100.0%

MIXED COMMERCIAL

WASTE USA August 20-24, 2001 Mixed Commercial Waste

Category 8/20 Newport 8/21 St. JB 8/21 Comm 8/21 Lyndinville 8/22 Orleans 8/22 Comm 8/22 Newport

Paper Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Net %Newspaper and inserts 30.8 2.0% 8.2 2.7% 7.9 1.7% 4.9 1.1% 5.2 3.1% 12.9 4.4% 4.7 1.6%Corrugated and kraft bags 131.5 8.6% 24.8 8.0% 24.5 5.3% 7.0 1.6% 60.6 35.9% 4.7 1.6% 16.4 5.5%White Office Paper 8.7 0.6% 16.6 5.4% 0.0 0.0% 1.2 0.3% 0.4 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 4.5 1.5%Non-white mixed paper 81.5 5.3% 27.8 9.0% 9.4 2.0% 9.3 2.1% 26.5 15.7% 2.5 0.9% 10.6 3.6%Dirty Paper 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazines, catalogs, coated paper 0.0 0.0% 17.4 5.6% 0.0 0.0% 4.8 1.1% 1.5 0.9% 4.5 1.5% 0.0 0.0%Boxboard 30.5 2.0% 7.4 2.4% 1.2 0.3% 18.5 4.1% 6.0 3.6% 4.5 1.5% 2.5 0.8%Coated boxboard 0.0 0.0% 3.1 1.0% 0.0 0.0% 3.0 0.7% 0.0 0.0% 1.5 0.5% 5.0 1.7%Books 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Paper Subtotal 283.0 18.4% 105.3 34.0% 43.0 9.4% 48.7 10.8% 100.2 59.3% 30.6 10.4% 43.7 14.7%Plastic

All Plastic bottles 29.6 1.9% 9.8 3.2% 0.0 0.0% 3.5 0.8% 2.5 1.5% 9.7 3.3% 13.8 4.6%Plastic bottles deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.8 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.5 0.2% 0.3 0.1%Plastic film clean 60.6 3.9% 7.3 2.4% 0.8 0.2% 12.2 2.7% 14.0 8.3% 0.5 0.2% 3.3 1.1%Plastic Film Dirty 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.5 0.9% 12.0 4.1% 4.7 1.6%All other plastic 33.3 2.2% 10.2 3.3% 12.8 2.8% 46.1 10.3% 0.3 0.2% 16.2 5.5% 4.0 1.3%Plastic tubs 0.0 0.0% 3.0 1.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.5 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Plastic Subtotal 123.5 8.0% 31.1 10.1% 13.6 3.0% 63.3 14.1% 18.3 10.8% 38.9 13.2% 26.1 8.8%Metal

Ferrous cans 14.3 0.9% 2.0 0.6% 0.0 0.0% 9.5 2.1% 3.0 1.8% 11.5 3.9% 5.0 1.7%All other ferrous 28.0 1.8% 1.8 0.6% 110.6 24.1% 15.0 3.3% 0.0 0.0% 1.3 0.4% 0.0 0.0%Aluminum cans and foil containers 2.7 0.2% 0.6 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.5 0.1% 0.4 0.2% 2.2 0.7% 0.5 0.2%Aluminum cans - deposit 0.0 0.0% 0.4 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.1 0.1% 0.0 0.0% 0.5 0.2%Scrap metal 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 2.0 0.7%Metal Subtotal 45.0 2.9% 4.8 1.6% 110.6 24.1% 25.0 5.6% 3.5 2.1% 15.0 5.1% 8.0 2.7%Glass

Glass bottles and jars 13.3 0.9% 10.2 3.3% 0.0 0.0% 6.0 1.3% 3.0 1.8% 7.0 2.4% 0.0 0.0%Glass bottles and jars - deposit 0.0 0.0% 1.2 0.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.5 0.5% 3.5 1.2%Glass Subtotal 13.3 0.9% 11.4 3.7% 0.0 0.0% 6.0 1.3% 3.0 1.8% 8.5 2.9% 3.5 1.2%Organic Material

Leaf and yard waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other organic 795.5 51.8% 94.3 30.5% 19.4 4.2% 213.3 47.5% 37.0 21.9% 152.2 51.8% 68.2 23.0%Organic Subtotal 795.5 51.8% 94.3 30.5% 19.4 4.2% 213.3 47.5% 37.0 21.9% 152.2 51.8% 68.2 23.0%Other Waste

Hazardous waste 1.0 0.1% 11.6 3.8% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Small appliances, Electronics 20.0 1.3% 0.0 0.0% 29.2 6.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Electronics 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 185.1 40.3% 8.0 1.8% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 0.0 0.0% 1.4 0.5% 0.0 0.0% 8.3 1.8% 0.5 0.3% 9.5 3.2% 22.5 7.6%Textiles 30.0 2.0% 1.2 0.4% 1.2 0.3% 21.0 4.7% 0.0 0.0% 12.5 4.3% 0.0 0.0%Tires 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Clean wood 28.0 1.8% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other waste 195.0 12.7% 48.2 15.6% 57.6 12.5% 55.4 12.3% 6.5 3.8% 26.4 9.0% 124.9 42.1%Other Waste Subtotal 274.0 17.9% 62.4 20.2% 273.1 59.4% 92.7 20.6% 7.0 4.1% 48.4 16.5% 147.4 49.6%Total 1534.3 100.0% 309.3 100.0% 459.7 100.0% 449.0 100.0% 169.0 100.0% 293.6 100.0% 296.9 100.0%(1) Not included in Total Average

WASTE USA August 20-24, 2001 Mixed Commercial Waste

Category

PaperNewspaper and inserts

Corrugated and kraft bags

White Office Paper

Non-white mixed paper

Dirty Paper

Magazines, catalogs, coated paper

Boxboard

Coated boxboard

Books

Paper SubtotalPlastic

All Plastic bottles

Plastic bottles deposit

Plastic film clean

Plastic Film Dirty

All other plastic

Plastic tubs

Plastic SubtotalMetal

Ferrous cans

All other ferrous

Aluminum cans and foil containers


Scrap metal

Metal SubtotalGlass



Glass Subtotal

Organic Material

Leaf and yard waste

All other organic

Organic SubtotalOther Waste

Hazardous waste

Small appliances, Electronics

Electronics

Construction waste

Textiles

Tires

Clean wood

All other waste


Total(1) Not included in Total Average

8/23 Barton 8/23 Newport 8/24 Derby 8/24 St. Johns 8/24 Newport (1)

Net % Net % Net % Net % Net % Total Net Total % MIN MAX

34.3 7.4% 8.9 3.1% 2.5 1.1% 7.3 3.6% 0.0 0.0% 127.6 2.7% 1.1% 7.4%

39.5 8.5% 20.8 7.2% 8.5 3.9% 13.5 6.7% 33.0 62.7% 351.8 7.5% 1.6% 35.9%

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 31.4 0.7% 0.0% 5.4%

14.1 3.0% 6.5 2.3% 19.9 9.1% 1.7 0.8% 0.0 0.0% 209.8 4.5% 0.8% 15.7%

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

0.0 0.0% 6.5 2.3% 19.7 9.0% 7.5 3.7% 0.0 0.0% 61.9 1.3% 0.0% 9.0%

23.5 5.0% 15.3 5.3% 10.5 4.8% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 119.9 2.6% 0.0% 5.3%

5.8 1.2% 1.5 0.5% 0.8 0.4% 5.9 2.9% 0.0 0.0% 26.6 0.6% 0.0% 2.9%

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

117.2 25.2% 59.5 20.7% 61.9 28.2% 35.9 17.8% 33.0 62.7% 929.0 19.8% 9.4% 59.3%

11.5 2.5% 14.3 5.0% 3.5 1.6% 4.0 2.0% 0.0 0.0% 102.2 2.2% 0.0% 5.0%

1.0 0.2% 0.5 0.2% 0.5 0.2% 0.5 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 4.1 0.1% 0.0% 0.3%

17.7 3.8% 5.7 2.0% 6.5 3.0% 4.5 2.2% 0.0 0.0% 133.1 2.8% 0.2% 8.3%

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 18.2 0.4% 0.0% 4.1%

22.8 4.9% 11.8 4.1% 10.8 4.9% 2.3 1.1% 2.5 4.8% 170.6 3.6% 0.2% 10.3%

2.0 0.4% 0.8 0.3% 0.8 0.4% 0.5 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 8.6 0.2% 0.0% 1.0%

55.0 11.8% 33.1 11.5% 22.1 10.1% 11.8 5.8% 2.5 4.8% 436.8 9.3% 3.0% 14.1%

4.0 0.9% 4.0 1.4% 3.0 1.4% 5.0 2.5% 0.0 0.0% 61.3 1.3% 0.0% 3.9%

19.0 4.1% 1.0 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 3.2 1.6% 0.0 0.0% 179.9 3.8% 0.0% 24.1%

2.5 0.5% 0.5 0.2% 1.5 0.7% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 11.4 0.2% 0.0% 0.7%

0.0 0.0% 1.0 0.3% 0.0 0.0% 0.5 0.2% 0.0 0.0% 2.5 0.1% 0.0% 0.3%

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 2.0 0.0% 0.0% 0.7%

25.5 5.5% 6.5 2.3% 4.5 2.1% 8.7 4.3% 0.0 0.0% 257.1 5.5% 1.6% 24.1%

12.5 2.7% 1.7 0.6% 4.0 1.8% 3.5 1.7% 0.0 0.0% 61.2 1.3% 0.0% 3.3%

4.0 0.9% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 10.2 0.2% 0.0% 1.2%

16.5 3.5% 1.7 0.6% 4.0 1.8% 3.5 1.7% 0.0 0.0% 71.4 1.5% 0.0% 3.7%

5.8 1.2% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 5.8 0.1% 0.0% 1.2%

193.5 41.6% 36.7 12.8% 72.3 33.0% 42.0 20.8% 0.0 0.0% 1724.4 36.8% 4.2% 51.8%

199.3 42.8% 36.7 12.8% 72.3 33.0% 42.0 20.8% 0.0 0.0% 1730.2 36.9% 4.2% 51.8%

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 12.6 0.3% 0.0% 3.8%

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 49.2 1.0% 0.0% 6.4%

0.0 0.0% 8.5 3.0% 2.0 0.9% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 203.6 4.3% 0.0% 40.3%

0.0 0.0% 21.7 7.6% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 63.9 1.4% 0.0% 7.6%

0.0 0.0% 66.3 23.1% 0.5 0.2% 32.0 15.8% 1.8 3.4% 164.7 3.5% 0.0% 23.1%

0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

3.0 0.6% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 31.0 0.7% 0.0% 1.8%

48.9 10.5% 53.4 18.6% 51.9 23.7% 68.2 33.7% 15.3 29.1% 736.4 15.7% 3.8% 42.1%

51.9 11.2% 149.9 52.2% 54.4 24.8% 100.2 49.6% 17.1 32.5% 1261.4 26.9% 4.1% 59.4%

465.4 100.0% 287.4 100.0% 219.2 100.0% 202.1 100.0% 52.6 100.0% 4685.9 100.0%

WSI August 27-31, 2001 Commercial Waste

8/27 Burlington 8/28 GarthierCategory Net % Net % Total Net Total %PaperNewspaper and inserts 3.7 2.0% 5.5 3.3% 9.2 2.6%Corrugated and kraft bags 38.6 21.0% 20.1 12.2% 58.7 16.8%White Office Paper 1.2 0.7% 23.1 14.0% 24.3 7.0%Non-white mixed paper 1.0 0.5% 4.0 2.4% 5.0 1.4%Dirty Paper 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Magazines, coated paper 6.8 3.7% 5.0 3.0% 11.8 3.4%Boxboard 2.8 1.5% 0.0 0.0% 2.8 0.8%Coated boxboard 0.8 0.4% 0.0 0.0% 0.8 0.2%Books 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Paper Subtotal 54.9 29.9% 57.7 35.0% 112.6 32.3%PlasticAll Plastic bottles 1.0 0.5% 2.3 1.4% 3.3 0.9% Plastic bottles deposit 0.2 0.1% 0.1 0.1% 0.3 0.1%Plastic Film Clean 0.6 0.3% 1.5 0.9% 2.1 0.6%Plastic Film Dirty 7.8 4.2% 7.0 4.2% 14.8 4.2%All other plastic 33.3 18.1% 3.8 2.3% 37.1 10.6%Plastic tubs 0.4 0.2% 0.4 0.2% 0.8 0.2%Plastic Subtotal 43.3 23.6% 15.1 9.2% 58.4 16.8%MetalFerrous cans 0.0 0.0% 1.2 0.7% 1.2 0.3%All other ferrous 5.8 3.2% 0.6 0.4% 6.4 1.8%Aluminum cans and foil 0.0 0.0% 1.1 0.7% 1.1 0.3% Aluminum cans - deposit 0.1 0.1% 0.1 0.1% 0.2 0.1%Scrap metal 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Metal Subtotal 5.9 3.2% 3.0 1.8% 8.9 2.6%Glass Glass bottles and jars 3.0 1.6% 2.0 1.2% 5.0 1.4% Glass bottles and jars - deposit 1.8 1.0% 0.0 0.0% 1.8 0.5%Glass Subtotal 4.8 2.6% 2.0 1.2% 6.8 2.0%Organic MaterialLeaf and yard waste 1.6 0.9% 0.0 0.0% 1.6 0.5%All other organic 56.4 30.7% 52.0 31.6% 108.4 31.1%Organic Subtotal 58.0 31.6% 52.0 31.6% 110.0 31.6%Other WasteHazardous waste 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Small appliances 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Electronics 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Construction waste 9.9 5.4% 12.4 7.5% 22.3 6.4%Textiles 0.0 0.0% 4.2 2.5% 4.2 1.2%Tires 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%Clean wood 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0% 0.0 0.0%All other waste 6.8 3.7% 18.4 11.2% 25.2 7.2%Other waste Subtotal 16.7 9.1% 35.0 21.2% 51.7 14.8%Total 183.6 100.0% 164.8 100.0% 348.4 100.0%

WASTE USA August 20-24, 2001

C + D Waste

Richford Albany Fairfax Richford Newport Orleans HardwickLoad weight (tons) 5.67 1.92 1.96 1.79 1.16 3.91 1.55% of total material 5.83% 1.98% 2.02% 1.84% 1.19% 4.02% 1.59%Category % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume

Asphalt shingles 25% 0% 0% 0% 85% 85% 0%Clean wood 58% 0% 45% 20% 0% 5% 10%Painted and pressure treated wood 0% 0% 15% 0% 0% 0% 87%Drywall 5% 0% 0% 15% 0% 0% 0% ABC waste 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%Corrugated cardboard 1% 0% 0% 5% 1% 2% 1%Scrap metal 2% 7% 5% 10% 10% 2% 0%Hazardous wastes 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Hazardous wastes w/ mercury 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0%MSW Bags 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Insulation 3% 0% 15% 0% 0% 0% 0%Plastic Film 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Chairs/couches/matresses 0% 45% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0%Electronics 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Tiles, flooring 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0%Bedding 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%All other C&D waste 5% 42% 14% 37% 4% 1% 1%Rugs 0% 5% 0% 8% 0% 5% 0%TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%


C + D Waste

Load weight (tons)% of total materialCategoryAsphalt shingles

Clean wood

Painted and pressure treated wood

Drywall

ABC waste

Corrugated cardboard

Scrap metal

Hazardous wastes

Hazardous wastes w/ mercury

MSW Bags

Insulation

Plastic Film

Chairs/couches/matresses

Electronics

Tiles, flooring

Bedding

All other C&D waste

Rugs

TOTAL

Danville Manchester Manchester St. Johns. Stowe Newport Newport St. Johns.5.27 13.74 14.41 4.76 5.22 0.6 1.19 2.17

5.42% 14.14% 14.83% 4.90% 5.37% 0.62% 1.22% 2.23%% by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume

1% 1% 2% 0% 0% 0% 100% 2%54% 10% 5% 10% 40% 40% 0% 10%40% 60% 55% 60% 30% 30% 0% 5%2% 7% 20% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 10% 5% 5% 8% 8% 0% 15%1% 2% 2% 1% 5% 5% 0% 10%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 1% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 1%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 3% 5% 2% 10% 10% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 1% 2% 2% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 20%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%2% 6% 6% 9% 2% 2% 0% 37%0% 0% 0% 1% 3% 3% 0% 0%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%


C + D Waste


Clean wood


Drywall

ABC waste


Scrap metal

Hazardous wastes


MSW Bags

Insulation

Plastic Film


Electronics

Tiles, flooring

Bedding

All other C&D waste

Rugs

TOTAL

Stowe Barton Danville Morrisville Newport Stowe Newport Stowe1.11 1.86 6.32 3.11 1.17 4.5 2.1 8.09

1.14% 1.91% 6.50% 3.20% 1.20% 4.63% 2.16% 8.32%% by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume

0% 0% 70% 0% 85% 0% 50% 10%5% 20% 15% 0% 10% 84% 0% 20%0% 40% 0% 60% 0% 0% 0% 45%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2%5% 0% 2% 0% 2% 3% 0% 0%5% 10% 1% 5% 1% 3% 0% 5%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

70% 5% 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0%0% 0% 2% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0%0% 15% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

13% 5% 10% 35% 0% 5% 50% 8%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%


C + D Waste


Clean wood


Drywall

ABC waste


Scrap metal

Hazardous wastes


MSW Bags

Insulation

Plastic Film


Electronics

Tiles, flooring

Bedding

All other C&D waste

Rugs

TOTAL

Stowe Total Material3.6 97.18

3.70% 100.00%% by Volume Weight average

5% 15%60% 23%0% 32%0% 6%0% 0%0% 4%0% 3%0% 0%0% 0%0% 0%0% 3%0% 0%0% 2%0% 0%0% 0%0% 0%

35% 11%0% 1%

100% 100%

WSIAugust 27-31, 2001

C + D Waste

Williston Burlington Colchester Burlington Jericho Burlington Colchester Burlington Shelburne Williston Essex Charlotte

Load weight (tons) 15.8 2.37 1.32 3.49 4.1 1.36 3.76 1.55 2.51 4.68 3.22 2.89% of total material 22.8% 3.4% 1.9% 5.0% 5.9% 2.0% 5.4% 2.2% 3.6% 6.8% 4.7% 4.2%Category % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume

Asphalt shingles 85% 0% 0% 0% 15% 0% 90% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0%Clean wood 0% 40% 10% 15% 15% 20% 1% 5% 16% 25% 5% 80%Painted and pressure treated wood 0% 5% 35% 25% 35% 15% 0% 7% 70% 25% 5% 8%Drywall 0% 30% 0% 5% 10% 10% 0% 0% 10% 10% 0% 0% ABC waste 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Corrugated cardboard 5% 5% 2% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 2%Scrap metal 5% 10% 5% 15% 5% 10% 5% 20% 0% 20% 0% 5%Hazardous wastes 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0%Hazardous wastes w/ mercury 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Insulation 0% 0% 0% 2% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0%Plastic Film 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%Chairs/couches/matresses 0% 0% 30% 15% 0% 0% 0% 35% 0% 0% 60% 0%Tiles, flooring 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%All other C&D waste 5% 10% 18% 18% 10% 35% 2% 30% 4% 10% 23% 5%Rugs 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 3% 0%TOTAL 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%


C + D Waste

Load weight (tons)% of total materialCategoryAsphalt shinglesClean woodPainted and pressure treated woodDrywall ABC wasteCorrugated cardboardScrap metalHazardous wastesHazardous wastes w/ mercuryInsulationPlastic FilmChairs/couches/matressesTiles, flooring All other C&D wasteRugsTOTAL

WSI Burlington Jericho S. hero S. Burlington Shelburne Shelburne Burlington Mansfield Georgia Small Ind. Essex Ctr.

1.97 1.03 0.7 0.76 2.12 0.55 1.4 0.58 3.23 2.02 0.45 1.682.8% 1.5% 1.0% 1.1% 3.1% 0.8% 2.0% 0.8% 4.7% 2.9% 0.7% 2.4%

% by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume % by Volume

0% 0% 20% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 99% 0%60% 0% 20% 5% 0% 0% 90% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0%20% 0% 25% 0% 15% 80% 5% 10% 0% 95% 0% 65%10% 0% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 2% 5% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 10% 10% 0% 15% 0% 2% 15% 95% 0% 0% 5%0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 3% 74% 50% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%0% 73% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 14% 0% 0% 0% 15%0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

10% 15% 15% 15% 18% 10% 3% 54% 5% 5% 1% 15%0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%


C + D Waste

Load weight (tons)% of total materialCategoryAsphalt shinglesClean woodPainted and pressure treated woodDrywall ABC wasteCorrugated cardboardScrap metalHazardous wastesHazardous wastes w/ mercuryInsulationPlastic FilmChairs/couches/matressesTiles, flooring All other C&D wasteRugsTOTAL

Jericho Charlotte Total Material

2.29 3.32 69.153.3% 4.8% 100.0%

% by Volume % by Volume Weight average

0% 0% 26%35% 30% 16%10% 20% 17%0% 15% 4%0% 0% 0%0% 1% 2%3% 7% 11%0% 0% 0%0% 0% 0%0% 2% 4%0% 2% 0%0% 0% 6%0% 0% 0%

52% 23% 12%0% 0% 0%

100% 100% 100%

VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDYaverage sample size of 258 pounds for residential waste and 286...

Documents

Transcript of VERMONT WASTE COMPOSITION STUDYaverage sample size of 258 pounds for residential waste and 286...