effects of affluence and population density on waste ... · pdf fileeffects of affluence and...

matsunaga-njt1-june7total-1 of 28 02/09/19 17:24

Effects of affluence and population density on waste generation

and disposal of municipal solid wastes

Ko Matsunaga and Nickolas J. Themelis

Earth Engineering Center, Columbia University, New York

ABSTRACT

This paper compares the rate of generation and means for managing municipal solid wastes

(MSW) in Japan and the U.S. A top priority of federal and local government in Japan has been to

minimize the generation of wastes and reduce landfilling, by means of recycling and combustion

to generate electricity. As a result, the per capita generation of MSW in Japan is 56.1% of that in

the U.S.1-4 and only 20.3% of Japan’s MSW, including ash from incineration, is landfilled.1 In

contrast, about 14.8% of the U.S. MSW is combusted and 57.4% is landfilled, excluding ash from

incineration.3 This study also examined the management of MSW in several other countries and

attributes the pressure or impetus on governments to manage the generation and disposal of

wastes (called here the “MSW Index”) to the product of two measurable factors: Affluence (as

measured by the GNP per capita) and population density. A higher standard of living results in

more wastes and also greater ability to invest in waste management systems; high population

densities imply scarce land resources and thus more pressure to preserve land and environmental

quality. According to the MSW index, the pressure on high population density affluent nations,

such as Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Japan, is twice as high as that on U.S. and

Australia.

INTRODUCTION

Next to the production of cement, municipal solid wastes (MSW) represent the largest mass of


solid materials generated by humanity. In the U.S., nearly 210 million tons of MSW are generated

annually. The reported MSW generation in OECD countries exceeds 600 million tons.5 The

principal means for managing the various materials contained in MSW are by recycling, recovery

of energy in Waste-to-Energy plants, anaerobic or aerobic bioconversion to a compost material,

and landfilling. The composition of the collected MSW depends principally on the economic

standard of living of a community. Within the developed nations of the world, the MSW

composition does not vary by much and is exemplified by the typical U.S. composition shown in

Table 1.3,5 However, there are substantial differences between Japan and the U.S. in a) the

amounts of MSW generated per capita, and b) the methods used for disposing wastes. For

example, an estimated 57.4% of the U.S. MSW is landfilled while in Japan, and more recently in

France and Germany, landfilling is considered to be environmentally undesirable and is allowed

only for the non-recyclable, non-combustible residues of MSW. The European Union (EU), in

consideration of the high global warming potential of methane emissions from landfills, has

established the EU Landfill Directive which is forcing cutbacks in the landfilling of wastes by

requiring the member states to reduce by 2016 the quantity of biodegradable material landfilled

to 35% of 1995 levels by 2016.6

Table 1. Principal Constituents of MSW in U.S., and Japan in 1990 (as % weight)3,5

The objectives of this industrial ecology study were to establish the rates of generation of MSW

in Japan and the U.S. and determine the underlying reasons for the differences in waste

management among these and other developed nations.


MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTES IN JAPAN

Due to the scarcity of landfill spaces and attention to the environmental problems associated with

MSW disposal, there has been strong support for MSW management by citizens and government

at all levels. As a result, Japan is now one of the leading countries in managing waste generation.

The rate of MSW generation in Japan (principally residential and commercial wastes) in fiscal

1999 totaled 53.7 million tons1 (Figure 1). This corresponded to a per capita generation of 0.42

metric tons per year. The present means of MSW management in Japan are shown in Figure 2.1 It

can be seen that 74.5% of the total MSW was combusted and only 20.3% was landfilled,

including ash from incineration.

Figure 1. Total and per capita solid waste generation in Japan13

Figure 2. Flow and means of disposal of MSW in Japan in 1999, in million metric tons (% of

total MSW is shown `in parentheses)1

Waste reduction efforts in Japan

Waste management in Japan is mainly the responsibility of local government. There are several

waste-reduction methods such as reusing shopping bags or requesting people to bring their carry-

on bags while shopping; minimization of packaging materials; extending the life of products; and

design of products so as to reduce the use of materials (de-materialization).


Re-use and recycling

Recycling is very successful in Japan with regard to some materials: In 1999, an estimated 55%

of the paper, 78-83% of metal cans, and 22.8% of PET bottles were recycled.7-10 As of April 2001,

air-conditioners, television sets, washing machines and refrigerators are required to be recycled

by the user, at a certain fee. The target is to close the material loop. The local government (e.g.,

at Nagoya, population 2.18 million) has organized recycling “flea” markets where people can buy

used products and materials. It is difficult to determine the volume of such re-use activities. On

the other hand, the volumes of recycled materials are recorded by each company and industry.

The following sections discuss the recycling of metals, plastics, paper, glass, steel can, aluminum

can, paper, and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic containers. The overall reported

recycling rate in Japan is reported to be 13% of the MSW collected.1

Metal recycling

There are two types of metal can, steel (54% of total) and aluminum (46%). The recycling rate of

steel cans has been estimated at 82.9% and of aluminum at 78.5%.7,8 Steel cans are used as drink

containers in E.U., Japan, and South Korea but not in the U.S.

Figure 3. Production and recycling of steel cans in Japan7

At this time, aluminum cans are the most popular containers for drinks all over the world. It is

interesting to note that although there is no deposit system for aluminum cans in Japan, the

recycling rate (78.5%)8 is higher than in the U.S. (62.5%)8. However, the total demand is much

higher in the U.S. (1.4 million tons per year vs. 0.28 million in Japan8 (Figure 4).


Figure 4. Production and recycling of aluminum cans in Japan8

Paper recycling

Figure 5 shows that although the consumption of paper in Japan increased in the last decade of

the 20th century, some of the use of virgin paper has been replaced by recycled stock. Table 2

compares the per capita consumption of paper in Japan (249.9 kg) with several other countries.9

Figure 5. Production and recycling rate of Paper in Japan9

Table 2. Annual Paper Consumption in some countries (kg per capita) 9

Plastics recycling

The global use of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) containers has been growing steadily, due to

their lightness, convenience of use, and recyclability. PET usage is expected to grow at 10% per

year and some countries have started to use PET containers for beer.10 The per capita annual

consumption of PET containers in Japan is 2.9 kg and in the U.S. 5.6 kg10. PET demand in Japan

is increasing as people move away from tap water, for fear of contamination, to bottled water.

Figure 6 reflects this trend.

Recycling of PET is not popular as yet in Japan and there is no deposit system. The first

recycling center for PET-bottles was established in 1993 but there was not enough recycled

material to supply the PET plants. In contrast, the first recycling factory in the U.S. was built in

1977 and in EU in 1980. In the recycling of PET bottle, some material is converted to plastic

fibers.


Figure 6. Production and recycling of PET containers in U.S., Japan, and E.U.10

Glass recycling

Glass is used extensively in Japan in beer, milk and sake bottles. However, PET containers are

making inroads in these markets. The recycling rate of glass bottles is very high, 77.8% in 2000.11

Figure 7 shows the global production and recycling rates of glass bottles in the period 1991-1999.

Figure 7. Glass bottle production and recycle in the world11

Waste-to-Energy in Japan

As noted earlier, Japan has tried to reduce waste generation and re-use or recycle as much as

possible of the MSW generated. Due to land limitation, the first priority in Japan has been to

reduce the amount of landfilled waste. As a result of this long-standing policy, presently 74.5% of

waste goes to combustion plants, in contrast to only 14.8% in the U.S. Thus, only 6.3% of the

MSW is directly landfilled in comparison to about 57.4% in the U.S.1,3

There are 1717 combustion plants in Japan of total capacity of 193,00 tons per day; of

these, 1103 (64.2%) are Waste-To-Energy (WTE) plants and 215 plants (12.5%) generate a total

of 1060 MW1. In comparison, there are 102 WTE facilities in the U.S. and generate 2,800 MW.

Waste management regulation in Japan

At the beginning of 2001, concern for the environment led to elevating the Agency of the

Environment to a Ministry by the government of Japan. There are several regulations concerning

waste management including:

The Basic Environment Law: This law became effective in 1993 to address new major problems


such as global warming. The law declares the basic principles of environmental policy, defines

the responsibilities of each actor in the society, prescribes the policy instruments to protect the

domestic and global environment, and establishes three basic principles of environmental policy:

• The blessings of the environment should be enjoyed by the present generation and by

successive generations (the UN concept of sustainable development).

• A sustainable society should be created where environmental loads by human activities are

minimized.

• Japan should contribute actively to global environmental conservation through international

cooperation.

Other environmental laws relating to MSW management are: Air Pollution Control Law; Water

Pollution Control Law; Environmental Impact Assessment Law; Recycling law of specific home

electrical products; Law in support of the use of recycled resources.

MANAGEMENT OF MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTES IN THE U.S.

Generally speaking, waste reduction is not a prominent issue in the U.S., although cities like

Chicago, Loa Angeles and New York have mounted public information programs aimed at waste

minimization. The per capita generation of MSW is about 720 kg per year 12. This is 80% higher

than that in Japan and the highest per capita waste generation in the world. Some of the reasons

are a lifestyle where “easier” and “larger” are preferred and most people can afford them; usually,

there is no direct charge for MSW and thus no incentive to reduce; also, there is no concerted

effort by the federal government in the direction of waste minimization. For example, the postage

rates for “junk” mail are very low. There is little re-use of products in the U.S., apart from

automobiles, although the web has encouraged the development of “waste exchanges” where

people trade used objects. With regard to recycling, the reported overall rate in the U.S. is 22.1%3,


in comparison to the 13.0% rate of recycling in Japan. However it should be noted that the rate of

waste generation in the U.S., and thus the opportunity for recycling, is greater than in Japan.

Unlike Japan and some European nations, the U.S. federal and state governments do not

restrict the use of land for landfilling. Of course, there are special circumstances, such as the

closing of the giant Fresh Kills landfill by New York City and State. However, these are dictated

by political pressures rather than by environmental concerns; for example, in the case of Fresh

Kills, most of the MSW is now exported to other states for landfilling, at the additional

environmental cost of ten million gallons of trucking fuel12.

Waste management regulations in the U.S

As in the case of Japan and other developed nations, the federal government in the U.S. has set as

its main policy “reducing, reusing, and recycling”.3,13 However, the fourth, and major, tool of

waste management in Japan, for example, the recovery of energy and materials by means of

Waste-to-Energy facilities, is not promoted by U.S. federal policy.

Some of the U.S. laws that relate to waste management are: The Resource Conservation

and Recovery Act (RCRA); RCRA Regulations (40 CFR Parts 240-299); Mercury-Containing and

Rechargeable Battery Management Act; RCRA Hotline Training Modules - "Introduction to

Other Laws that Interface with RCRA"; RCRA Hotline Training Modules - "Introduction to RCRA

Statutory Overview".

COMPARISON OF MSW MANAGEMENT IN JAPAN AND THE U.S.

As discussed earlier, both governments espouse the three basic steps of reducing the amount of

MSW to landfills: Reduce, reuse and recycle.3,13 The fourth basic step, used principally in Japan


and to a certain extent in the U.S., is the recovery of energy from wastes. In Japan, the

government has made waste reduction an integral part of the national policy for waste

management and succeeded in reducing the total amount of waste. In the U.S., there is little

movement in this area. This is apparent from Table 3 that compares the per capita generation of

various components of the MSW stream, in Japan and the U.S.1,3,5

Table 3. Waste Composition in Japan and U.S. (in million tons)1-5

“Re-use” of products sounds like a reasonable way to go but, with the exception of

automobiles, very few products are actually re-used in affluent nations like Japan and the U.S.

The amount of re-use would increase if there were re-manufacturing processes that guarantee

product reliability.

Table 4 summarizes the findings of this study with regard to waste generation and

management in Japan and the U.S.1-4 Figure 8 summarize the means used for managing of the

generated MSW in Japan and the U.S.1-4

Table 4. Waste management and composition in Japan and U.S. (in million tons and as % by

weight)1-4

Figure 8. MSW management in Japan and the U.S.1-4

FACTORS INFLUENCING MSW GENERATION AND MANAGEMENT


Affluence

One of the objectives of this study was to determine whether there is a relationship between

affluence, as measured by the per capita GNP, and government and public attitudes towards

MSW reduction and management. Figure 9 shows the rate of MSW generation for several

nations as a function of GNP.5 Also, Figure 10 shows how the generation of MSW has changed

with time for several nations.5 A comparison of the Japan and U.S. plots in Figure 9 indicates that

some other factor, apart from culture or history, may play a role in shaping government and

public attitudes towards the MSW issue.

Figure 9. Relation between GNP and generated MSW in several countries5

Figure 10. Relation between MSW and year5

Population density

Historically, the disposal of MSW became an issue first in highly populated areas, such as New

York City. The issue of proper disposal came later as the standard of living in urban areas

improved. Affluence implies the abundance of goods. The use of goods results in the generation

of wastes. Also, an affluent society is bound to care more and spend more on the disposition of

wastes. Furthermore, between two affluent communities, the one that possesses less land per

person is bound to be more careful regarding the use of land for MSW disposal. This line of

reasoning led us to seek a correlation between the pressure or impetus on government and public

to manage properly the municipal solid wastes and two readily quantifiable factors: GNP per

capita, which represents affluence, and population density, which represents land scarcity.


Impetus for better MSW management = MSW Index = f[(GNP per capita), (population density)]

(1)

The most likely function is the product of these two factors, since the effects are clearly additive.

The power exponent of each function will depend on its relative importance in increasing the

impetus for MSW management. The products of the available GNP and population density data

were computed in various combinations for a large number of nations and the results were

compared to the known data regarding waste generation and means of management. The most

promising combination at this time was as follows:

MSW Index for MSW management = (GNP/ population) (population/surface area)

= (GNP/surface area) (2)

The higher the value of this function is for a particular geographic area, the greater will be the

pressure for establishing a good MSW management system. The rationale is simple enough. With

little money (low GNP per capita), people cannot buy products and also tend to hold on to

whatever they own or can find. Affluent people dispose much and also can afford better waste

management systems. Finally, the higher is the population density, the better MSW management

is required due to sanitation problems and the cost of land.

On the basis of equation 2, Luxembourg has the highest impetus index, followed by Japan, the

Netherlands, and Belgium (Figure 11). Figure 11 also shows that the MSW Index for the U.S. is

not very high and this may explain the relative lack of government and public interest in MSW

management. Nations at an Index number above 3, such as South Korea, are under extreme

pressure to control the MSW flow and already taking steps in that direction.


Figure 11. Relation between Waste Index and year

A question arises with regard to two Scandinavian nations, Norway and Sweden, that are

known for sound MSW management and yet, according to the impetus index, they are not under

strong pressure. It is clear that some other factors, such as culture, may need to be included in the

correlation of Equation 2.

CONCLUSIONS

High GNP per capita reflects the ability of people to purchase goods. The use of goods eventually

leads to the generation of municipal solid wastes. Also, affluence affords the provision of better

systems for the management of wastes. However, this study made clear that some other factor

than GNP per capita influences policies and actions regarding the generation and management of

MSW. For example, Japanese citizens, although at nearly the same standard of living as in the

U.S. and U.K., generate only 56.1% of the U.S. per capita MSW. Also, Japan landfills only

20.3% of its MSW, including the WTE ash, plants, and combusts 74.5% of its MSW in costly

Waste-to-Energy facilities that convert solid wastes to electric energy and heat. In contrast, the

U.S. landfills 57.4% of its MSW and combusts only 14.8% of its MSW. Therefore in both

respects, control of generation of wastes and technologies used for managing wastes, Japan is

ahead of the U.S. This study showed that the second most important factor in influencing

government and public attitudes toward waste management, at the national level, is population

density. Higher densities demand better management of MSW because of sanitation problems and

the scarcity and cost of land.


The impetus on governments and people for better management of MSW was expressed as the

ratio of GNP to land surface.

The higher is this index, the greater is the need for more advanced MSW management.

For example, the Netherlands regulated recycling of used electrical products since 1999. Japan

regulated the recycling of air-conditioners, washing machines, TVs and refrigerators, as of April

2001. Both countries have the highest indices, next to Luxembourg. Also, most of the EU

countries have a high index, which explains the high concern of EU for environmental issues.

South Korea's index of 2945 in 1997 is growing and already it exceeds that of the U.S.

(610 in 1997). In the last two years, South Korea has embarked on a MSW improvement

program that includes the construction of Waste-to-Energy pants. An inspection of the derived

MSW index shows that most nations fit in the expected pattern. There remain questions to be

answered by further analysis. For example, two Scandinavian nations, Norway and Sweden, are

known for advanced MSW management. Yet, according to their impetus index, they are not under

strong pressure. It is clear that some other factors, such as culture, can influence national attitude

towards waste management. Further work in this research center will attempt to improve on our

understanding of the influential factors and develop the preliminary MSW-Index that was

presented in this report.

REFERENCES

1. Generation and Management of MSW in 1999 in Japan. Minister of environment in Japan.

2002. In public.

2. Population data. Statistics Bureau & Statistics Center, Japan. 1999. In public.

3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN THE UNITED


STATES: 1999 FACTS AND FIGURES. In public.

4. National Population Projections, I. Summary Files. U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division,

Population Projections Branch. 2000. In public.

5. OECD Enviromental Data (Donnees OCDE sur l’environnement), 1999.

6. European Environment Agency. Working Paper Update on the environmental dimension of

the EU Sustainable Development Strategy from Environmental signals 2002 (forthcoming)

Prepared for Environment Council, 4 March 2002. In public.

7. Japan Steel Can Recycling Association, Japan. Submitted for publication.

http://tomcat.rits.or.jp/steelcan/

8. Japan Aluminium Can Recycling Association, Japan. Submitted for publication.

http://www.alumi-can.or.jp/

9. Advertisement section; The Paper Recycling Promotion Center in Japan, In public.

(http://www.prpc.or.jp/)

10. PET bottle Recycling association, Japan. Submitted for publication. http://www.petbottle-

rec.gr.jp/english/index.html

11. Glass Bottle Recycling Promoter Association, Japan. Submitted for publication.

http://www.glass-recycle-as.gr.jp/

12. Columbia University 2001 “Life After Fresh Kills”. (http://www.columbia.edu/cu/earth)

13. Yukio Shioda; Zyunichi Yamaguchi. Gomi no hanashi (Story of waste); Minister of

environment in Japan. 1996.

End

About the Authors


Nickolas J. Themelis

Director, Earth Engineering Center,

Stanley-Thompson Professor, Earth and Environmental Engineering

(Henry Krumb School of Mines), Columbia University

500 West 120th St.#1047 Mudd , New York, NY 10027; e-mail: [email protected]

web page: www.columbia.edu/cu/earth

Ko Matsunaga

Junior Research Associate, Earth Engineering Center, Columbia University

E-mail: [email protected]

Mitsubishi Heavy Industries., Ltd.

E-mail: [email protected]

B.S. Keio University

M.S. IEOR, Earth Resources Engineering Columbia University


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Total and per capita MSW generation in Japan13

Figure 2. Flow and means of disposal of MSW in Japan in 1999, in million metric tons (and as %

of total MSW in parentheses)1


Figure 4. Production and recycling of aluminum cans in Japan and the U.S.8 Figure 5. Production and recycling rate of paper in Japan9 Figure 6. Production and recycling of PET containers in U.S., Japan, and E.U.10 Figure 7. Production and recycling of glass bottle in Japan11 Figure 8. MSW management in Japan and the U.S.1-4 Figure 9. Per capita generation of MSW vs. GNP in various nations5

Figure 10. National trends in MSW generation5 Figure 11. National MSW Indices vs. time

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Principal constituents of MSW in Japan and the U.S. (as % weight)3,5 Table 2. Per capita annual consumption of paper in different nations (kg)9 Table 3. Waste composition in Japan and the U.S. (in million tons)1,3,5


Table 4. MSW generation and management in Japan and the U.S. (in million tons and % by weight)1-4


Figure 1. Total and per capita MSW generation in Japan 13

Landfill

3 4 (6 3%)

To combustion

40 0 (74 5%)

To disassemble

and separation

Collected

53.7 (100%)

Collection and

disposal by other

0.4

To recycling

4 4 (8 2%)

Total landfill

10.9 (20.3%)

Total recycled

7.0 (13.0%)


Figure 2. Flow and means of disposal of MSW in Japan in 1999, in million metric tons (and as % of total MSW in parentheses)1



Figure 4. Production and recycling of aluminum cans in Japan and the U.S.8


Figure 5. Production and recycling rate of paper in Japan9

Figure 6. Production and recycling of PET containers in U.S., Japan, and E.U.10


Figure 7. Production and recycling of glass bottle in Japan11

Figure 8. MSW management in Japan and the U.S.1-4


Figure 9. Per capita generation of MSW vs. GNP in various nations5


Figure 10. National trends in MSW generation5


Figure 11. National MSW Indices vs. time


Table 1. Principal constituents of MSW in Japan and the U.S. (as % weight)3,5

Country Paper and

carton Food and

garden waste Plastics Glass Metals Textiles, etc Japan 38 32 11 7 6 7 U.S. 38.1 28.3 10.5 5.5 7.8 9.8

Table 2. Per capita annual consumption of paper in different nations (kg)9 Country Paper consumption(kg) Australia 242.2 Austria 193.3 Belgium 340.7 Canada 243.1 Denmark 269.4 Finland 351.7 France 192.8 Germany 232.5 Italy 189.6 Japan 249.9 Luxembourg 260.0 Netherlands 272.9 New Zealand 181.5 Norway 227.6 Spain 172.2 Sweden 277.1 Swiss 246.0 Taiwan 229.4 UK 215.8 US 331.7

Table 3. Waste composition in Japan and the U.S. (in million tons)1,3,5 Nation Paper and

carton Food and plant

waste Plastics Glass Metals Textiles, etc

Japan 20.2 17.0 5.8 3.7 3.2 3.7 U.S. 78.8 58.6 21.7 11.4 16.1 20.3


Table 4. MSW generation and management in Japan and the U.S.

(in million tons and % by weight)1-4 Nation Year Population,

millions Total

amount of MSW

Recycling Compos-ting

Combus-tion

Land-filling

Disassemble and separation

Japan 1999 126.7 53.7 4.4 Unknown 40.0 3.4 5.9 8.2% N/A 74.5% 6.3% 11.0% U.S. 1999 273.6 206.9 45.7 11.8 30.6 118.7 Unknown 22.1% 5.7% 14.8% 57.4% N/A

effects of affluence and population density on waste ... · pdf fileeffects of affluence and...

Documents