|
 |
|
Please see EPA's Climate Change site for current information on climate change and global warming. EPA no longer updates EPA's Global Warming Site, but is maintaining this archive for historical purposes. Thank you for visiting the archive of EPA's Global Warming Site.
Measuring Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Waste
| |
| New | EPA's Climate and Waste Program has developed new greenhouse gas emission factors for the following materials: carpet, personal computers, clay brick, concrete, and fly ash. Click HERE to view reports presenting the methods used to develop these emission factors. |
Solid waste managers have several different options for managing waste (e.g., source reduction, recycling, incineration, landfilling), all of which impact greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions differently. In order to determine the best option for minimizing emissions, waste managers need to be able to compare the GHG impacts of each option. Below are answers to questions on how GHGs from waste management are measured, as well as EPA's role in assisting stakeholders in their measurement efforts.
How do you measure the climate change benefits of waste reduction?
| Currently, the US recycles about 30 percent of its waste—equivalent to removing nearly 25 million cars from the road. Increasing this percentage to just 35 percent would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by an additional 10 MMTCE. |
To help measure the climate change benefits of waste reduction, EPA conducted a comprehensive study of GHG emissions and waste management. The study, along with its follow-up reports, estimated the life-cycle GHG emissions associated with managing a total of 24 types of waste materials: aluminum cans, branches, carpet, clay bricks, concrete recycled as aggregate, corrugated cardboard, dimensional lumber, fly ash, food scraps, glass, grass, leaves, magazines/third-class mail, medium-density fiberboard, newspaper, office paper, personal computers, plastics (HDPE, LDPE, PET), phonebooks, steel cans, textbooks, and yard trimmings. In addition, the study included six mixed waste categories: metals, MSW, organics, paper, plastics, and recyclables. Management options analyzed in the study included waste prevention, recycling, composting, incineration, and landfilling. This report, titled "Solid Waste Management and Greenhouse Gases: A Life-Cycle Assessment of Emissions and Sinks" (EPA530-R-02-006), is available for free download on the Reports, Papers, and Presentations section of this site, or can be obtained from EPA's Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Hotline at (800) 424-9346.
The emission factors for these material types for various waste management scenarios can be viewed in metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE) or in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2E). Note that the emission factors represent the GHG emissions associated with managing 1 short ton of MSW in the manner indicated. GHG savings should be calculated by comparing the emissions associated with the alternative scenario with the emissions associated with the baseline scenario, as opposed to simply multiplying the quantity by an emission factor. For instance, the GHG savings of recycling 1 short ton of aluminum instead of landfilling it would be calculated as follows:
(1 short ton x -4.03 MTCE/short ton) — (1 short ton x 0.01 MTCE/short ton) = -4.04 MTCE
The research indicates that, in terms of climate benefits, waste prevention is generally the best management option. Recycling is the next best approach. The research enables waste managers to analyze their potential to reduce GHG emissions based on the characteristics of their community’s waste stream and the management options available to them.
Waste prevention can make an important difference in reducing emissions. By cutting the amount of waste we generate back to 1990 levels, we could reduce GHG emissions by 18 million metric tons of carbon equivalent (MMTCE), the basic unit of measure for GHGs. This is based on a change in waste generation as a result of source reduction to reach 1990 levels. EPA estimates that current national recycling efforts—30 percent recycling in 2000—yield annual GHG emission reductions of 32.9 MMTCE, compared to landfilling the same material. This is equivalent to removing nearly 25 million cars from the road. Increasing the recycling rate to 35 percent would reduce GHG emissions by another 10 MMTCE, for a total of 42.9 MMTCE.
Every little bit helps! For example, by recycling all of its office paper waste for one year, an office building of 7,000 workers could reduce GHG emissions by 546 metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE), when compared to landfilling. This is the equivalent to taking nearly 400 cars off the road that year. If an average family of four were to recycle all of its mixed plastic waste, nearly 340 pounds of carbon equivalent emissions could be reduced each year. Back to top
 How can I calculate GHG emissions from solid waste management?
EPA created the WAste Reduction Model (WARM) to help solid waste planners and organizations track and voluntarily report GHG emissions reductions from several different waste management practices. WARM is available for free download in Microsoft Excel and as an on-line calculator. Back to top
How can I calculate the life-cycle GHG emissions and energy impacts of products I purchase or manufacture?EPA created the Recycled Content (ReCon) Tool to help companies and individuals estimate life-cycle GHG emissions and energy impacts from purchasing and/or manufacturing materials with varying degrees of post-consumer recycled content. ReCon is available for free download as a Microsoft Excel file. Back to top
Why is recycling more beneficial than waste prevention for some material types?For some materials (e.g., aluminum, corrugated cardboard, newspaper, dimensional lumber, and medium-density fiberboard), the GHG benefits of recycling are greater than source reduction for the current mix of virgin/recycled inputs. This is because recycling is assumed to displace 100 percent virgin inputs, whereas source reduction is assumed to displace some recycled and some virgin inputs. For more information please see "Why Recycling Some Materials Reduces GHG Emissions More than Source Reduction." Back to top
Can EPA's waste emission factors be used for assigning "ownership" of GHG emissions reductions?EPA’s waste emission factors were designed to estimate the GHG impacts of the entire life-cycle of the materials analyzed. The emission factors are not intended to assign ownership for GHG emissions reductions. Back to top
How has EPA helped individual stakeholders measure the GHG impacts of their waste management activities?EPA has provided technical, outreach, and educational assistance to a variety of stakeholders. Below, stakeholders are listed under four broad categories of support: Technical Assistance, State Action Plan Assistance, Outreach and Education, and WasteWise Program Assistance.
Technical Assistance (e.g., modifying EPA emission factors, providing input on technical issues)
Climate Neutral Network (CNN)
China State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA)
Department of Energy (DOE)’s 1605(b) Program
Environment Canada
Integrated Solid Waste Association (IWSA)
International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI)
Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP)
National Association of Home Builders (NAHB)
National Recycling Coalition (NRC)
National Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP)
Northeast Recycling Council (NERC)
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
Recycled Paper Trade Association (RPTA)
Taiwan Environmental Protection Administration (EPA)
World Resources Institute (WRI)
State/Local Action Plan Assistance
Delaware
Iowa
Minnesota
Montana
New Jersey
San Francisco
Outreach and Education (e.g., making presentations at conferences, introducing the WARM model)
Air and Waste Management Association (A&WMA)
American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA)
American Plastics Council (APC)
Greater Philadelphia Commercial Recycling Council (GPCRC)
Michigan Recycling Coalition (MRC)
National Association of Counties (NACO)
New York Chapter of the Solid Waste Association of North America (NYS-SWANA)
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)
Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA)
WasteWise Program Assistance (e.g., providing technical support)
Crown, Cork and Seal
Ford
General Motors
Interface
Mead
Public Service Electric and Gas (PSE&G)
SC Johnson Back to top
| |
|
|