regional recyclable material prospectus for the 14 mid-american … · 2018. 6. 13. · an appeal...

f3c3Re 0703 Mid-America Council of Recycling Officials

Regional Recyclable Material Prospectus for the 14 Mid-American States

Prepared by

The Midwestern Office of The Council of State Governments (CSG) and

Resource Recycling Systems (RRS)

for

the Mid- America Council of Recycling Officials (MACRO)

with a grant from the U.S. EPA

copyright 1993

Acknowledgements: Many thanks to the members of MACRO, who tirelessly provided information from their states and valuable comments on the drafts. Thanks to RRS for their fine work and for patiently responding to all input.

All projections and written explanations of projections provided by Jim Frey and Loch McCabe of Resource Recycling Systems, Michigan.

All other research and writing compiled by Laura Kliewer Foster, edited by David Ensign, formatted by Jean Loomis, Midwestern Office of The Council of State Governments.

For further information, contact CSG: 641 E. Butterfield Road, Suite 401, Lombard, Illlinois 60148,708/8 10-0210.

Printed on Recycled Pager (Cover 100 Percent Post-consumer Content, Text 15 Percent Post-consumer Content)

Regional Recyclable Material Prospectus i

Mid-America Council of Recycling Omcials

TABLE OF CONTENTS

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

SECTION 1: WHERE W E HAVE COME . AN OVERVIEW OF STATE RECYCLING LEGISLATION. POLICIES. PROGRAMS AND RESOURCES IN THE MACRO REGION

LEGISLATION ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Table: Major Waste ReductiodRecycling Legislation

RECYCLED PRODUCTS PROCUREMENT ........................................................................................... 5 EDUCATION/IRA”IG ....................................................................................................................... 6

RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................... 7 Table: State Associations of Recyclers

Table: Directories and Reports Available from Each State

SECTION II: WHERE W E ARE GOING . STATE COMMITMENTS TO THE FUTURE; PROJECTIONS OF RECYCLABLE MATERIALS SUPPLY

MACRO STATES’ COMMITMENT TO THE RECYCLING FUTURE ................................................. 11 PROJECTIONS OBSERVATIONS ........................................................................................................ 12 PROJECTIONS . MACRO REGION ..................................................................................................... 13 MAJOR REGIONAL GENERATION AREAS FOR RECYCLABLE MATERIALS (MAP) .................. 14 PROJECTED MAJOR PROCESSING AREAS FOR RECYCLABLE MATERIALS (MAP) ................. 15 FIBER .................................................................................................................................................... 16

Proistion Tables 1995 and 2000 Projected Regional Supplies of:

Old Newsprint (ONP) .................................................................................... 18 Old Corrugated Cardboard (OCC) .................................................................. 19 Old Magazines (OMG) .................................................................................. 20 Mixed Office Paper (MOP) ............................................................................ 21

Maxi Projected Major End-Markets for:

ONP ............................................................................................................... 23 occ ....................................................................... ’ ....................................... 24 OMG ............................................................................................................. 25 MOP .............................................................................................................. 26

ii Regional Recyclable Material Prospectus

We hope that companies considering locating new or expanding manufacturing capacity that utilizes

recyclable materials as a feedstock will use this prospectus as a "starter kit" to get a picture of the MACRO region's recycling infrastructure and the

opportunities available in this region. The projections contained herein are not intended to be

a pedormance summary of recycling in each MACRO state. Companies will need more specific data from each state on the supplies and locations of a specific material. We encourage you to call the state contact people listed in Resources: A Guide to Technical and Financial Assistance Available in the MACRO States for further information. Thank you

for your interest, and we look forward to your assistance with developing recycling markets

in our region!

Mid-America Council of Recycling Officials October 1993

Mid-America Council of Recycling Officials

GLASS ................................................................................................................................................... 27 Proiection Tables

1995 and 2000 Projected Regional Supplies of: Clear Glass Bottles ......................................................................................... 28 Green Glass Bottles ........................................................................................ 29 Amber Glass Bottles ...................................................................................... 30

Projected Major End-Markets for Container Glass ......................................... 32 METAL .................................................................................................................................................. 33

Mws

Proiectioq Tables 1995 and 2000 Projected Regional Supplies of:

Steel Cans ...................................................................................................... 34 Aluminum Cans ............................................................................................. 35

m-xi Projected Major End-Markets for:

Steel Cans ...................................................................................................... 37 Aluminum Cans ............................................................................................. 38

PLASTIC ................................................................................................................................................ 39 Proiection Tables

1995 and 2000 Projected Regional Supplies of: HDPE Bottles ................................................................................................. 40 PET Soft Drink Bottles .................................................................................. 41

Projected Major End-Markets for PET Soft Drink and HDPE Bottles ............. 43 NOTES TO TABLES ............................................................................................................................. 44 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................................................. 49

Ma2s

Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10

Table 11

Table 12

Basic Waste Generation Estimates Used in Analysis .......................................................... 50 Base Waste Composition Used in Analysis ......................................................................... 50 MRF Throughput Capacity Profiles (Percent of Tonnage) .................................................. 53

Percent of OCC Processed by Selected Facilities ................................................................ 54 Substitute 1995 OCC Multipliers for Some States ............................................................... 54 Recovery Rates for Bottle Bill Materials in Michigan 8z Iowa ............................................ 55 State Landfill Disposal Bans of Projected Materials ........................................................... 56 State Recovery Goals and Estimated Recycling Rates to Meet Goals ................................. 56 Estimated Year 2000 Capture Rates by Material as Driven by State Recovery Goals and

State Materials Bans ....................................................................................................... 57 Major ONP, OCC, MOP, and OMG End-Market Mill Types and Waste Paper Consumption

Profile (Percent of Capacity) for Each Product ............................................................... 59 Average Steel Consumption by Furnace Type .................................................................... 60

MRF Throughput Capacity Profiles (Percent of Tonnage) -Bottle Bill States .................... 53

Table 13 Estimated Cullet Use by Color of Cullet Used to Make Clear. Brown. and Green Bottles ... 61 C 1 Tab!e 14 Es:Lmiteb Facility Cu!let Capacity ..................................................................................... ui

Regional Recyclable Material Prospectus iii

INTRODUCTION

AN APPEAL To INDUSTRY

The 14 states within the Mid-America Council of Recycling Officials (MACRO) region have made a strong commitment to recycling, through adopting comprehensive solid waste management legislation, establishing waste reduction and recycling goals, and building the infrastructure needed to attain to these objectives.

Due to the phenomenal increase in recycling collection programs over the past decade, the region is now at a critical juncture. Too few manufacturers in the region utilize recyclables as manufacturing feedstock to consume many of the recyclables that will be collected through the end of the decade. Collection of recyclables will continue with the ardor evident in the past few years only if markets grow.

We know that manufacturers need to be assured of a continued supply of quality materials in order to make a commitment to site new factories or expand manufacturing capacity which utilizes recyclables as a feed stock. The MACRO states have committed the legislative and departmental muscle necessary to build a recycling collection infrastructure essential to manufacturers' needs.

This prospectus contains information on this infrastructure in each state - from legislation to recycled products procurement. Perhaps most importantly, within this prospectus you will find not only projections for the supply of many recyclable materials within the 14-state region, but also the surplus projected to be available after taking end-use into account. We hope this prospectus informs you of the significant business opportunities we believe exist in the MACRO region.

After this prospectus sparks your interest in the region, use the companion Resources: A Guide to Technical and Financial Assistance for Recycling Business Development in the 14 MACRO States to leam about the technical and financial assistance available in each state. Used together, we hope these tools will provide you with the foundation you need to decide to use this region's hearty supply of recyclable materials in your manufacturing.

ABOUT MACRO

MACRO is a multi-state member association that encourages and coordinates the review and development of regionally effective programs and policy issues directed at recycling, market development and source reduction. Working in cooperation with the public and private sectors, MACRO places special emphasis upon:

- coordination with other member state organizations that address recycling, market development and source reduction issues,

- cooperative research projects and exchange of information on program accomplishments among member states.

- developing recommended standards, guidelines and programs to enhance recycling, market development and source reduction,

- collection and dissemination of information and activities related to legislation, industry trends, state programs and related issues of relevant interest.

Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota and Wisconsin are members of MACRO. The Midwestern Office of the Council of State Governments serves as secretariat to MACRO.

1 Regional Recyclable Material Prospectus


SECTION 1: WHERE WE HAVE COME. . . AN OVERVIEW OF STATE RECYCLING

LEGISLATION, POLICIES, PROGRAMS AND RESOURCES IN THE MACRO REGION

Regional Recyclable Material Prospectus 2


LEGISLATION

In the late 1980s, many states were spurred to consider waste reduction legislation due to landFi11 requirements contained in RCRA Subtitle D and to U.S. EPA's adoption of a "waste hierarchy" and national recycling goals. The Mid-American states rose to the task, adopting innovative legislation that will continue to ensure a strong infrastructure for recycling in the years to come.

0 In Illinois each county waste management plan must include a recycling program.

Indiana's 1990 law established waste reduction goals of 35 percent by 1995 and 50 percent by the year 2000. It also mandated formation of solid waste management districts. In the fall of 1992, the districts turned in 20-year plans for managing their solid waste, including recycling initiatives. Today, Indiana has two state agencies with major responsibilities in promoting recycling, as well as three others with some involvement.

In Iowa, cities, counties and permitted sanitary disposal projects must participate in a comprehensive solid waste management plan. The state provides financial incentives to regionalize plans. Since 1988, when the state's recycling division was created, Iowa has gone from minimal recycling to nearly total access for all residents.

In Kansas, each county must submit a plan for managing solid waste. Recycling and drop-off centers have increased from approximately 100 in 1990 to 500 in 1993.

0 By July 1, 1994, universal collection programs are to be established in each county in Kentucky.

In 1988, the Michigan Natural Resources Commission adopted a solid waste policy for the state. Based on volun~xy participation, the policy set a goal of 25 percent diversion of waste from landfills. The state also has bottle bill legislation.

With legislation requiring high recycling rates -- 45 percent in metro counties by 1996 -- and not just waste diversion, Minnesota had already achieved a 33 percent overall recycling rate by the fall of 1992, up from just nine percent in 1989.

Missouri divided the state into 20 regions, and districts can form within the region for solid waste management purposes. Plans for reducing the amount of waste going into landfills by 40 percent by 1998 are due by the end of 1993.

The Nebraska Integrated Solid Waste Management Act states that each municipality must have an integrated solid waste management plan by 1994. The state is complimenting the recycling collection infrastructure with an an aggressive policy of recycled product procurement.

0 North Dakota mandated eight solid waste mangement districts and each has prepared a management plan. Recycling is also becoming more attractive as a result of RCRA Subtitle D criteria, since fewer landfills and longer hauls increase disposal and transportation costs.

~~


Mid-America Council of Recycling: Officials

Ohio

Pennsylvania

South Dakota

Wisconsin

House bill 592 established Ohio's solid waste planning process and resulted in the creation of 48 solid waste management districts. Each district must determine a baseline recycling rate (for July 1989 -June 1990)


PROCUREMENT

The MACRO states have shown they mean business in recycling by using the strength of millions of dollars - dollars that go toward state purchases of recycled products. Every MACRO state has a mandate or pricing preference for state agency purchase of products which contain recycled content.

MANDATES

A majority of the MACRO states have shown their willingness to build the recycling industry through mandating the purchase of products with recycled content, even through times when those products may have cost much more. Through these efforts to bolster the industry, and increase the demand for the commodities, products with recycled content are gaining a competitive foothold in the market:

In Iowa, state agencies must purchase recycled printing and writing paper, and soybean- and starch-based plastics whenever reasonably priced and of good quality. Kansas state agencies must buy recycled paper. Kentucky has developed specifications for purchasing products with recycled content. State entities are required to purchase products with these specifications whenever feasible. All of the state's paper contains recycled content, as well as many other office supplies. The state recently received an award from the National Association of State Purchasing Officials (NASPO) for its efforts in this area. In Michigan, 50 percent of paper purchased has to contain recycled content. Twenty percent of materials, supplies and equipment purchased also must be made from recycled content. Public entities in Minnesota must consider recycled content when purchasing materials and developing bids. Effective July 1,1996, copier paper must contain at least 10 percent postconsumer content. Legislative mandate gives preference to the procurement of recycled products in Nebraska. In practice, Nebraska has a nationally recognized "Buy Recycled" policy, ranking second in the nation in percentage use of recycled paper products. North Dakota is increasing the mandated recycled content in its paper purchasing incrementally -by the year 2000,80 percent of the paper purchased by the state must have recycled content. In Ohio, state departments must utilize recycled content copier paper and re-refined oil whenever feasible. The Department of Administrative Services is developing regulations to allow state agencies to buy recycled products, even if they are at a higher cost. Paper purchased by the state in Wisconsin must have recycled content, even if it costs more. Products with recycled content are always purchased if they are cost-effective and of good quality.

PRICE PREFERENCES

To help spur an industry that is still very young in many respects, half of the MACRO states have legislated price preferences for products with recycled content. Indiana, Michigan, Missouri, and South Dakota have mandated a ten percent price preference across the board for the purchase of products with recycled content. Indiana also has a price preference of 15 percent for products and supplies that contain at least 50 percent postconsumer content. Re-refined oil receives a five percent pricing preference in Iowa.



Illinois

Indiana

Pennsylvania commanded the Department of General Services to offer a five percent preference for products that contain postconsumer materials. Minimum content requirements for paper are also specified. The state received an award from NASPO for having the most aggressive state practice in purchasing recycled paper.

Illinois Recycling Association (IRA), Michael Marubio, 312/939-2985

Indiana Recycling Coalition, Janet Neltner, 317/283-6226

COOPERATIVE PURCHASING

Kansas

Kentucky

Michigan

In addition to the individual state efforts, states within the MACRO region are making cooperative purchases of products with recycled content. One of the largest such purchases to date is in the procurement of high- speed xerographic paper. Coordinated by the Council of Great Lakes Governors, seven states banded together to sign the Great Lakes Recycling Agreement, resulting in the purchase of approximately 20 million pounds of recycled paper, and directives to purchase re-refined motor oil for use in state vehicles.. The states are also in the process of formulating bids for the cooperative purchase of computer forms, re-refined oil, rewedded tires, envelopes and soft paper products. For further information contact Sheila Leahy, deputy director, Council of Great Lakes Governors, 3 12/407-0177.

Kansas Recyclers Association, Russell Fallis, Jr., 316/662-0551

Kentucky Recycling Association, Anthony Knoll, 606/356-8555

Michigan Recycling Coalition, Howard Hampton, 517/371-7073.

EDUCATIONITRAINING

Missouri

Nebraska

The MACRO states believe that education is a cornerstone of a strong recycling infrastructure. Not only are state officials working to ensure a steady supply of recyclable materials to meet your manufacturing needs, they are also commiting the time and expertise to educate on the importance of quality in supply. Many have held workshops specifically geared toward training local recycling coordinators in quality control. Others have developed curricula and have state recycling coordiantors on hand to speak to communities. And most are working with their state recycling association to ensure broad-based instruction in this important area.

State recycling organizations are coalitions of recycling professionals and activists. Businesses are included in the organizations' membership. For specific information on the activities and training in each state, contact the associations below.

Missouri Recycling Association (MORA), Steve Burdic, 816/849-2294

Nebraska State Recycling Association, Kay Stevens, 402/444-4188

State Associations of Recyclers

South Dakota

Wisconsin

South Dakota Solid Waste Management Association, Deb Barton, 605/394-6747

Associated Recyclers of Wisconsin, Vera Straud, 4141679-21 32

I Iowa I Iowa Recycling Association, Mick Barry, 515/265-0889 I

I Recycling Association of Minnesota (RAM), Fran Kurk, 612/481-1143 I I Minnesota

I

Ohio I Association of Ohio Recyclers, Patricia Smith, 216/867-5225 I I Pennsylvania I Public Recycling Officials of Pennsylvania (PROP), David Biddle, 215/247-2327 I



RESOURCES

Each MACRO state has developed a wealth of information on its recycling infrastructure. Most have recycled materials market directories, which list processors, brokers and manufacturers of recycled products. States also publish annual reports on progress in waste reduction and task forces' reports on specific issues. State - by-state listings of these resources, as well as other vital information such as recycling center locations, listings of collection programs, and state newsletters on recycling can be found below.

Directories and Reports

State

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

DirectorylReport

Local Solid Waste & Recycling Officials Directory

Curbside Programs

Directory of Illinois Recycling Centers

Illinois Recycled Materials Market Directory

Indiana Recyclable Material Market Directory

Availability and Location of Markets for Recyclables in Indiana

Status of the Recycling Markefi

Goals, Objectives and Swategies for Recycled Paper in Indiana

Indiana Waste Tire Task Force Final Report

Recycle Indiana! Your Guide to Recycling Locations

Iowa State Recycling Directory

Video

Directory of Kansas Recycling Centers and Programs

~~ ~

Description

Contact information for county, municipal and regional coordinators

Lists processors and buyers for the following materials: aluminum and steel cans; lead-acid batteries; glass; motor oil; paper (buyers); paper (dealers); paper (consultants); plastics; tires (buyers); tires (processors)

Contains listings of brokers, processors and end-users of recyclable materials. Published every six months, continually updated on database.

Yearly report

Newsletter of market information for rey clables

1992 final report of the Indiana Recycled Paper Task Force

1992

List of recycling locations throughout the state. On database, updated on hardcopy every 6 months

Published bi-annually, lists collectors, processors, brokers and end-users of recvclable materials in the state.

Describes state programs available to businesses utilizing recyclables.

Contains listings of collection programs and recycling centers

contact

Illinois Department of Energy and Natural Resources

217/524-5454

Department of Commerce, 3 1 1/232- 8940

Indiana Department of Environmental

Management, 3171232- 8172

Iowa Department of Natural Resources,

Iowa DNR, 515/281- 8941

515/281-8941

Kansas Business and Industry Recycling Program, Inc., 913/273- 6808.



State Directory/Report

Kansas (cont.)

Kentucky

Kansas Directory of Manlgfacturers and Products

Recycling Facilities in Kentucky

Missouri

KRBA Report to the Legislature on Recycling Market Activity

Recycled Materials Market Directory

Market Development and Recycling Database

Michigan Directory of County Solid Waste Coordinators and Collection Programs

Recycled Materials Market Directory

"The Business of Recycling"

An Economic Study of the Impact of Wastepaper Markets on the Minnesota

SCORE report

I Collection Center list I Recycling and Waste Reduction Report

Nebraska

Litter Reduction and Recycling Grant I Pronram annual report

Description

Industrial & community recycling pr0g-s

Includes paper, plastic, metals, glass, compost and wood waste

Public & private collectors, materials collected and quantities

Given bi-annually

Newsletter describing current recycling programs and efforts

listed by material (glass, metals, pallets & wood, plastics, paper, drums & barrels, and miscellaneous), the directory includes county collection data, processors, brokers, and manufacturers of recycled products

Fact sheet on things companies should b o w when starting to recycle

Collectors, processors and end-users of recyclables are listed under the following categories: individual company listings; industry by county; glass; metals; paper; plastics; barrel reconditioning; spent lead acid batteries; textiles; waste tires; used auto piuts; used oil; wood waste; out-of-state end markets; and recycling contacts

May 1992

Annual

Annual

1992

Includes listings of cnrbside and dropoff programs, as well as recycling centers. 1993 directory will also contain processors, brokers and manufacturers of recyclables.

Contact

Kansas Department of Commerce, 913D96- 3483

Kentucky Recycling Bmckerage Authority,

502/564-7140

Office of Waste Reduction Services,

800/662-9278

Minnesota Office of Waste Management, Christ Cloutier, 6 121649-5750

Missouri Evironmental Improvement &

Energy Resources Authority,

3 14/751-4919

Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality, 402/47 1-4210



Contact State Directory/Report Description

North Dakota North Dakota

Department of Health and Consolidated

Laboratories, 701/221- 5150

Norih Dakota Recyclers

North Dab& Solid Waste Management Plan

Updated quarterly

August 1993

Study to help determine how markets for recylables can be spurred in the states of Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming, as well as the provinces of Manitoba a@ Saskatchewan

Feasibility Study for the Mid-Continent Recycling Association

Updated every 2 years, lists brokers, processors and end-users

Ohio Division of Litter Prevention &

Recycling, DNR, 614n65-1069

Ohio Secondary Market List

Directory of Ohio Recycling Opportunities Open to the Public

Lists dropoff programs, recycling centers and facilities

Updated in 1993

Updated in 1993

Ohio Curbside Programs

Buy Recycled! Directory of Ohio Vendors of Recycled Products

Industrial Waste Survey Ohio EPA

Pennsylvania Curbside programs Lists communities, materials collected, contact person and frequency of pickup

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental

Resources,

I 1 7fl81-7382

County Recycling Coordinators

MRF list

Recycling Directory Published annually. Customized reports and floppy discs available -for paper, plastic, metals, glass and tires. Tracks materials users, processors, scrap dealers, drop-off and buy-back centers

Contains recycling rates and tonnages, etc.

Annual report to the General Assembly on Act 101

Directory of Unpermitted Processors ~

Updated every 18 months South Dakota Department of

Environment and

Natural Resources,

6051713-3 151

South Dakota

Comwsters Directon,

1992 Tire Abatement Study

Fifteen-Year Solid Waste Plan 1991

Wisconsin Wisconsin Recycled Markets Directory, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources,

On computer disc, updated quarterly. contains brokers and companies that buy or sell

July 1992 Glass Container Markets in Wisconsin 608i261-7680

Generation and Demand for Selected Post-Consumer Papers in Wisconsin

February 1993

February 1992 Supply and Demand Study: Recyclable Meial Cans

Supply and Demand Study: Recyclable Plastics

July 1992



Section 11: Where We Are Going. . . State Commitments to the Future of Recycling; Projections of Recyclable

Materials Supply



TOWARD THE FUTURE

MACRO STATES' COMMITMENTS TO RECYCLING'S FUTURE

As you will see in the next section, by the end of the century, additional remanufacturing capacity will be needed in the MACRO region. Recycling collection will have become increasingly more economical and accessible, resulting in a window of opportunity for manufacturers who use recyclables as a feedstock.

Economically, manufacturers would be hard pressed to find a better region in which to site new or expanding remanufacturing capacity. Two recent studies confirm that the Mid-American region has advantages over other areas of the country in productivity growth, quality infrastructure and labor training. A study by the Georgia Institute of Technology found that the region outpaces the South in training of workers and favorability of business climate. And only Japan has had a higher growth in productivity than the Great Lakes states.

MACRO state recycling officials are undergirding the strong rise in recycling collection in the region with market development initiatives. Several states are forerunners in helping spur the development of market cooperatives, so smaller communities will be able to become more efficient in delivering collected recyclables to processors and end-users. Each state has committed technical and financial assistance to ensuring growth in markets for recyclables. Detailed information on this state information can be found in the companion to this prospectus, Resources: A Guide to Technical and Financial Assistance for Recycling Business Development in the 14 MACRO States

To help you better understand the investment and growth potential for your company, state-by-state and regional projections of the supply, demand and surplus of 11 recyclable materials through the year 2000 have been developed by Resource Recycling Systems of Ann Arbor, Michigan. The remainder of this prospectus describes and explains these projections under four headings:

Fiber: old newspaper (ONP), old corrugated cardboard (OCC), old magazines (OMG) and mixed office paper (MOP)

Glass: clear, green and amber bottles

Metal: steel and aluminum cans

Plastic: HDPE bottles and PET soft drink bottles


PROJECTIONS

OBSERVATIONS

As a major center of the U.S. population with strong recycling collection programs, the MACRO region is able to generate large quantities of recyclable materials for end-markets.

With its strong historical manufacturing base, the MACRO region demonstrates considerable strength in near term demand for these targeted recycled materials. Without accounting for import or export, the year 1995 demand, in aggregate across all materials, covers over 87 percent of the projected available supply.

However, the year 2000 shows a considerable shortfall in demand, again without accounting for import and export, as the coverage ratio of demand to supply slips to approximately 70 percent. This supply/demand gap of over seven million tons of material each year represents a significant opportunity for expansion of existing businesses within the region and for introduction of new businesses - all targeted at increased usage of recycled materials as industrial feedstocks. This opportunity will significantly advance as additional sources of reliable, high-quality supplies are developed, and as economic development efforts further target product manufacturers that utilize recovered materials as feedstocks.

Should those end markets grow with the available supply, further business opportunities will develop in the processing business where a shortfall of over five million tons is projected in the year 2000. This represents approximately 20,000 tons per day of processing capacity which will need to be distributed across the region based on population density and the strength of the existing processing infrastructure in any one area.

At $25,000 to $50,000 in capital required per ton/day processing capacity, the shortfall in processing represents approximately $500 million to $1 billion in capital improvements required over the remainder of the decade. With approximately 50 jobs provided per 200 ton/day processing capacity, a workforce of 5,000 would be required just in these new processing facilities. As for in-place processing capacity, these same factors would indicate an investment already made that exceeds $1.2 billion in current dollars with the upper limit possibly as high as $2 billion.

Similar employment and investment factors can be developed for the end-market investments that are required, but are outside the scope of this study. As well, the competitive dynamics of the open marketplace do not always respond in predictable ways. Existing facilities could be run on multiple shifts or expanded to build demand. Exporting to markets outside of the MACRO region will continue to be an important force in a particular commodities supply/demand equation. Finally, new markets could develop that aren't presently anticipated.

These observations, however, indicate that significant investments have already been made in both the supply and demand infrastructure within the MACRO region. If current trends continue, further investments of the same type will be required with many of these investments playing to the basic strengths of the MACRO region in material handling and manufacturing.

Just as the existing infrastructure is supported by strong public sector participation, this future growth will require similar attention to a balance between the roles of the public sector and the private industry that moves the vast majority of the tonnages identified in this analysis.



MACRO REGION TOTALS

Projected Regional Supplies of Selected Materials (Tons) - 1995

Newsprint Cardboard Mixed Office Paper Magazines PET Soft Drink Bottles HDPE Bottles Clear Glass Green Glass Amber Glass Steel Cans Aluminum cans

1995 Quantity

Generated

4,232,266 1 1,273,154 2,819,117 1,585,055

202,923 319,782

2,s 1 1,778 1,02 1,305

636,712 878,399 557,455

1995 Projected

Supply

1,856,820 6,3 33,149

355,727 266,5 19 95,637

132,589 708,285 322,279 178,879 317,798 303,7 19

1995 End Market Demand

2,014,772 5,079,066 1,145,099

243,442 230,000 253,000

1,200,000 270,000 405,000 992,000 616,500

1995 End Market Surplus (Deficit)

157,952 (1,254,083)

789,371 (23,078) 134,363 120,4 1 1 49 1,7 15 (52,279) 226,121 674,202 312,781

MACRO REGION TOTALS

Projected Regional Supplies of Selected Materials (Tons) - 2000

Newsprint Cardboard Mixed Office Paper Magazines PET Soft Drink Bottles HDPE Bottles Clear Glass Green Glass Amber Glass Steel Cans Aluminum cans

2000 Supply Generated

4,285,709 11,476,402 2,874,206 1,625,247

205,803 324,757

2,839,089 1,03 1,537

644,439 889,854 569,25 3

2000 Processing Capacity

3 ,OS 1,922 8,556,4 12 1,324,452

840,435 145,043 217,136

1,6 19,004 541,838 363,688 646,269 416,240


2,014,772 5,079,066 1,145,099

243,442 230,000 253,000

1,200,000 270,000 405,000 992,000 616,500

2000 Processing

Surplus (Deficit)

1,227,3 94 2,321,272

976,441 575,216 50,258 86,110

913,644 221,183 185,459 335,132 1 13,117

2000 End Market Surplus (Deficit) ( 1,037,150) (3,477,346)

(179,353) (596,994)

84,957 35,864

(419,004) (271,838)

41,312 345,73 1 200,260

Prepared by Resource Recycling Systems for the Mid-America Council of Recycling Officials with a grant from the US. EPA.



m

a C

c

8

p 0

m


Jebraska \

I 1 4

0 Missouri* I Lansas

*The maioriW d malerial ncovwed from i .-the St. io& area is lent diractly io

end-merka mils and is not prccwwd al the MRF locations.

U Legend 0 Areas with 11 + Processors 0 Areas with 6-1 0 Processors @ Areas with 2-5 Processors 0 Areas with 1 Processor

Major Processing Areas

i I , ‘ I , I


FIBER

OLD NEWSPRINT (ONP)- DEMAND AND SUPPLY OBSERVATIONS

Large amounts of ONP are consumed by recycled newsprint, recycled tissue, boxboard, corrugated medium, and linerboard mills, and by cellulose insulation manufacturers within the MACRO region. While these mills each consume relatively small portions of ONP, they add up to a significant source of demand.

Large amounts of ONP are or will soon be exported to mills just outside the jurisdiction of the MACRO states for use as feedstock in some of the new de-ink newsprint mills just to the southeast (Georgia, Alabama); to the southwest (Texas) and especially to Canada (Ontario and Quebec). These facilities target small subregions of the MACRO area.

The supply/demand output projects a slight surplus of mill capacity in the region in 1995, and a potential deficit by the year 2000. There will be, however, additional de-ink and non-de-ink mill demand just outside of the region.

The supply of newsprint has been and will continue to be a mainstay of residential recycling programs. Increasingly, newsprint recycling is also part of commercial and institutional recycling projects. The projected regional recovery rate for ONP is 44 percent in 1995 and 71 percent in the year 2000. Strategies to further develop de-ink newsprint mill capacity within the region should take these regional factors into careful consideration. Consultation with industry will likely confirm that the current market arrangements, with incremental improvements in ONP feedstock usage at existing mills, is the most likely strategy for serving the demand requirements for ONP in the MACRO region.

OLD CORRUGATED CARDBOARD (0Cc)- DEMAND AND SUPPLY OBSERVATIONS

OCC is the primary material collected from commercial and industrial generators and is increasingly collected from residential generators in multi-material commingled recycling programs. OCC represents the largest quantity supplied of a material for recycling expected to be available in the MACRO region - at over three times the quantity of newsprint, the next largest quantity material. Available OCC supply projected in this analysis is targeted at achieving a 56 percent recycling rate throughout the region in 1995, compared to a national average of 59 percent recovery in 1992.

OCC demand within the region is also the largest in volume, again at nearly 2.5 times that of ONP. This OCC demand is spread relatively evenly throughout the region, falling short in some states, while in excess in others. The shortfall in demand within the region, representing required exports or newhefurbished mill opportunities, is also the largest of any of the commodities.

While regional projected supply of OCC may exceed consumption by mills in 1995 and 2000, there are major OCC consumers outside of the region, in Tennessee and New York in particular, that will consume OCC from the MACRO region. As well, a large share of the potential shortfall in demand could be met within the region through conversion of virgin feedstock containerboard mills to recycled feedstock.

OLD MAGAZINES (OMG) - DEMAND AND SUPPLY OBSERVATIONS Demand for old magazines is driven primarily by the requirements of new de-ink mills for production of recycled-content newsprint. Some is also used in production of recycled boxboard. Within the MACRO region there is a concentration of OMG recycling capabilities in Illinois and Michigan. Some capacity is also available in Indiana. Regional capacity for OMG is growing significantly due to new de-inking capacity requiring OMG feedstock pianned for Pennsylvania. Together these point to a good balance of supply and



demand in the near term and long term. Like ONP, though, most future demand for OMG will be to the northeast in Canada (Ontario and Quebec), and several new mills that will take OMG being built in Texas.

Recovery of OMG is expected to develop slowly, but increase by the end of the decade. Regionally, OMG recovery is projected at about 17 percent in 1995, with increases up to 52 percent by year 2000. On the processing side this will result from a combination of "commingled fiber" recovery from residential and commercial generators at MRFs and paper packers throughout the region.

MIXED OFFICE PAPER (MOP) - DEMAND AND SUPPLY OBSERVATIONS Supply of MOP is also expected to develop slowly in the near term and increase rapidly by the year 2000. Regionally, MOP recovery is projected at about 12 percent in 1995 and 46 percent by the year 2000.

MOP is used in de-inking facilities for tissue production ,and increasingly for production of recycled content printing/writing papers. MOP is also used in small quantities for recycled boxboard, corrugated medium and recycled linerboard products, where it is not de-inked.

In the near term, the MACRO region has a strong demand surplus for MOP, with much of this demand concentrated in Wisconsin where nearly 44 percent of the region's MOP is likely to be directed. Other "surplus" states are Pennsylvania, Ohio, Minnesota, Kentucky, Iowa and Indiana.

By 2000, however, as MOP supplies increase, additional investment is needed to offset anticipated demand deficits in the region. MOP will have to be used more as a feedstock in printing/writing paper to overcome this gap. As with OCC, this provides opportunities for conversion of existing virgin feedstock mills to recycled feedstock, with MOP being one of the sources of that recycled feedstock, depending on the grades of paper being produced.



OLD NEWSPRINT (ONP)

Projected Regional Supplies of Old Newsprint (Tons) - 1995

Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin MACRO Region

1995 Quantity

Generated

600,000 33 1,244 169,658 114,485 199,259 555,730 280,734 143,000 11 1,989 35,370

737,489 682,339 43,272

227,700 4,232,266

1995 Projected

Supply

408,819 61,516 75,686 44,000 27,690

19 1,854 232,890 62,545 35,334 15,737

298,618 284,176

4,056 113,900

1,824,528

1995 End Market

Demandrl]

25 1,108 165,489 54,690 9,979

35,664 283,120 73,477 45,000 20,000 15,000

278,013 375,234

2,000 405,997

2,014,772


(157,711) 103,973 (20,996) (34,021)

7,974 9 1,266

(159,4 13) (17,545) (15,334)

(20,605) 91,058 (2,056)

292,097 157.952

(737)

[I] Significant demand for ONP also exists in adjacent states outside of the MACRO region.

Projected Regional Supplies of Old Newsprint (Tons) - 2000

Illinois Indiana Iowa KanSaS

Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin MACRO Region

2000 Quantity

Generated

601,837 337,814 175 ,O 14 117,502 201,532 560,566 289,866 147,500 112,123 34,447

750,114 687,064 41,631

228,700 4,285,709

2000 Available

Supply

458,3 11 287,142 148,762 44,000

119,435 364,352 246,386 125,375 95,304 25,736

609,645 284,176 37,468

205,830

2000 Minimum

End Market Demand[']

25 1,108 165,489 54,690 9,979

35,664 283,120 73,477 45,000 20,000 15,000

278,013 375,234

2,000 405,997

3.051.922 I 2.014.772

2000 Additional Processing Required

49,492 225,626 73,076

0 9 1,745

172,498 1 3,496 62,830 59,970 9,999

3 1 1,027 0

33,412 9 1,930

1,195,102

2000 End Market Surplus (Deficit) (207,204) (121,652) (94,072) (34,021) (83,771) (81,232)

(172,909) (80,375) (75,304) (10,736)

(331,632) 91,058

(35,468) 200,167

(1,037,150) [l] Significant demand for ONP also exists in adjacent states outside of the MACRO region.

Prepared by Resource Recycling Systems for the Mid-America Council of Recycling Officials with a grant jrom the U.S. EPA.



OLD CORRUGATED CARDBOARD (OCC)

Projected Regional Supplies of Corrugated Cardboard (Tons) - 1995


1995 Quantity

Generated

1,582,760 846,822 383,425 374,349 489,961

1,386,122 912,026 729,298 417,115 75,830

1,905,203 1,6 1 1,101

100,940 458,200

11,273,154

1995 Projected

Supply

1,066,980 429,810 264,950 261,539 286,648 8 16,8 16 5 12,830 37 1,855 109,251 27,356

1,005,804 826,564 32,047

320,700 6,333,149

1995 End Market

Demand[']

392,909 586,808 283,991 43,200

213,633 926,200 246,456 4 1,769

0 0

965,04 1 721,106

0 657,954

5,079,066


(674,071) 156,998 19,041

(218,339) (73 ,O 15) 109,384

(266,374) (330,086) (109,251) (27,356) (40,763)

( 105,458) (32,047) 337.254

(1,254,083) [ 11 Significant demand for OCC also exists in adjacent states outside of the MACRO region.

Projected Regional Supplies of Corrugated Cardboard (Tons) - 2000


Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin MACRO Region

2000 Quantity

Generated

1,587,605 87 1,276 395,647 385,177 509,902

1,4 12,7 17 946,539 752,250 428,003 77,116

1,942,167 1,s 87,3 36

88,766 49 1,900

11,476,402

2000 Available

Supply

1,208,994 740,585 336,300 26 1,539 302,186 9 18,227 804,558 639,413 363,802 57,614

1,578,470 826,564 75,45 1

442.7 10 8,556,412

2000 Minimum

End Market Demandrl]

392,909 586,808 283,991 43,200

213,633 926,200 246,456 4 1,769

0 0

965,04 1 72 1,106

0 657,954

5,079,066

2000 Additional Processing Reauired

142,014 3 10,775 7 1,349

0 15,538

101,411 29 1,728 26755 8 254,552 30,258

572,666 0

43,404 122.010


(8 16,086) ( 153,777) (52,309)

(218,339) (88,553)

7,973 (558,102) (597,644) (363,802) (57,614)

(613,428) (105,458) (7545 1) 215.244

2,223,263 I (3,477,346) [I] Significant demand for OCC also exists in adjacent states outside of the MACRO region.

Prepared by Resource Recycling Systems for the MidAmerica Council of Recycling Officials with a grant from the US. EPA.



1995 Quantity

Generated

OLD MAGAZINES (OMG)

Projected Regional Supplies of Old Magazines (Tons) - 1995 1995

Projected Supply

181,628 102,897 29,396 ,50,308 59,511

203,874 77,559

3 14,599 45,076 10,379

221,516 201,586

13,126 73,600

1,585,055


54,530 8,640

12,749 6,344 2,795

38,909 15,369 8,027 1,570 2,028

50,903 4 1,776

780 22,100

266,519

1995 End Market

Demand[']

72,894 4,85 1 1,944 1,901

0 66,125 6,048

0 0 0

26,784 48,120

0 14,774

243,442


18,365 (3,789)

(10,805) (4,443) (2,795) 27,216 (9,321) (8,027) (1,570) (2,028)

(2491 19) 6,344 (780)

(7,326) (23,078)

[I] Significant demand for OMG also exists in adjacent states outside of the MACRO region.

Projected Regional Supplies of Old Magazines (Tons) - 2000


2000 Quantity

Generated

182,184 106,628 30,540 5 1,799 61,345

207,458 80,748

324,500 46,128 10,414

226,521 203,295

1 1,886 81,800

1,625,247

2000 Available

Supply

97,932 63,977 18,324 10,557 25,662 95,183 48,449

194,700 27,677 5,492

129,954 4 1,776 7,132

73,620 840.435

2000 Minimum

End Market DemandIlI

72,894 4 , s 1 1,944 1,901

0 66,125 6,048

0 0 0

26,784 48,120

0 14,774

243.442


43,402 55,337 5,575 4,213

22,867 56,274 33,080

186,673 26,106 3,464

79,05 1 0

6,352 5 1,520

573.916


(25,038) (59,125) (16,380) (8,657)

(25,662) (29,05 8) (42,401)

(194,700) (27,677) (5,492)

(103,170) 6,344

(58,846) (596,994)

(7,132)

[l] Significant demand for OMG also exists in adjacent states outside of the MACRO region.




~~ ~

1995 Projected

Supply

MIXED OFFICE PAPER (MOP)

Projected Regional Supplies of Mixed Office Paper (Tons) - 1995 1995 End 1995 End Market Market Demand Surplus

(Deficit)

Generated

I I

Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin

428,124 307,917 72,28 1

133,414 180,063 321,699 188,287 81,033

125,799 30,925

273,988 610,405 38,783 26.400

I MACRO Region I 2,819,117

59,732 9,084

15,616 6,339 5,330

63,167 50,000 7,574 7,852 1,833

65,681 49,383

936 13.200

36,048 35,669 26,017 6,156

16,531 5 1,208

107,700 5,292

0 0

115,834 236,824

0 507.820

(23,685) (263 85)

10,401 (183)

11,201 (1 1,959)

57,700 (2,282) (7,852) (1,833) 50,153

187,44 1 (936)

494.620 355,727 I 1,145,099 I 789,371

Projected Regional Supplies of Mixed Office Paper (Tons) - 2000


2000 Quantity

Generated

429,434 3 16,686 75,016

137,231 184,592 329,930 195,924 83,583

127,985 30,738

282,234 613,119 36,033 3 1.700

2,874,206

2000 Available

Supply

230,840 190,O 12 45,010 27,970 77,221

15 1,373 117,555 50,150 76,79 1 16,210

161,9 16 118,445 32,430 28.530

~

2000 Minimum

End Market Demand

36,048 35,669 26,017 6,156

16,531 5 1,208

107,700 5,292

0 0

115,834 236,824

0 507.820

1,324,452 I 1,145,099


17 1,107 180,927 29,394 21,631 71,891 88,206 67,555 42,576 68,939 14,377 96,235 69,062 3 1,494 15,330

968,724


(194,792) (154,343) (18,993) (21,814) (60,689)

(100,165) (9,855)

(44,858) (76,791) (16,210) (46,082) 118,379 (32,430) 479,290

(179,353)




6 4 1 2 0 7 3 4 0 1 16 11 1 9

NOTES: 1995 AND 2000 PAPER END-MARKET DEMAND ESTIMATES

7 7 2 2 1 6 2 2 0 0 16 9 0 6

General Comments

Old newsprint (ONP), old corrugated containers (OCC), mixed office paper (MOP), and old magazines (OMG) are re-manufactured into new products by more than 150 facilities in the Mid-America region. The waste paper consumption “picture” is in constant flux due to changing economics and technologies. Thus the waste paper consumption pattems and capacities of these facilities should be considered “ball park” in quality.

Number of Paper Mills in MACRO Region, by Material Purchased

State ___


ONP I OCC MOP 1 2 2 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 14 8 0 9

OMG 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

Reference Sources All States: 1993 Lockwood-Post’s Directory of the Pulp, Paper, and Allied Trades. Miller Freeman, Inc. 1992.

All States: Pulp and Paper 1993 North American Factbook. Miller Freeman, Inc. 1992.

All States: Pulp and Paper Company Profiles. Miller Freeman, Inc. 1992.

All States: Paper Recycling Committee. 1992 Annual Statistical Summary Recovery Paper Utilization. American Forest and Paper Association. April 1993.

All States: Chris Beck, List of Cellulose Insulation Manufacturing Facilities. Cellulose Insulation Manufacturers

All States: Papermatcher - A Directory of Paper Recycling Resources. American Paper Institute, Inc. 2nd ed., 1992. IL, KS, MI, MN, MO, ND, OH, PA, SD, WI: Chris Beck, List of Cellulose Insulation Manufacturing Facilities.

Association. June 1993.

Cellulose Insulation Manufacturers Association. June 1993.

IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, MI, MN, OH, PA, WI: Creating Recycled Materials Markets for Mixed Office Paper -Roles, Responsibilities and Pressure Points. Metropolitan Council. Prepared by Resource Recycling Systems, Inc. 1993.

IN, IA, WI: The Paper Stock Report. Various issues. 1992 and 1993.

IN: Mitra Khazai, Recycling Program Manager, Indiana Department of Commerce, Office of Energy Policy. Personal Communication. May 1993.

MO: Ed Hurley, Manager of Legislative Affairs, Jefferson Smurfit Corporation, St. Louis, Missouri. Personal Communication. June 1993.


A

Projected Major End-Markets for Old Newspapers

40 I

bl I

I

mnbmarM d b and i8 no( the MRF lomiom. A Areas with 6-10 Pulp Mills

A Areas with 2-5 Pulp Mils A Areas with 1 Pulp Mill


-+ Regional recyclables flowing to mills out of region

I Michigan

I i

A I end-marka milla and is nol processadat the MRF locations.

PmpamdbyRsswnr,RecycEngSyttemrfcftheMid-A~ Count9 d Reqdng Offieialp with a grant from the U.S. EPA.

! I

> Legend A Areas with 11+ Pulp Mills A Areas with 6-1 0 Pulp Mills A Areas with 2-5 Pulp Mills A Areas with 1 Pulp Mill


No materials flow out of the region

I I

Projected Major End-Markets for Old Magazines

m Michigan Missouri*

the St. Louis area is sent directly to end-tmkel milb and ia not procbsoed at the MRF locatii. to Texas Legend

A Areaswith 1 PulpMill Major Processing Areas

* Regional recyclables flowing to mills out of region

J P ~ b y R a r o u c a , R e c y o C n g ~ ~ h M i d - A m e r i c a C a r n d OiReqdng 0- wilh a grad fromthe U.S. EPA.

l i I I

Projected Major End-Markets for Mixed Off ice Paper

Number in bold indicates virgin miiis with the potential to recehre MOP.

1

A Missouri* Kansas

Legend

A Areas with 6-1 0 Pulp Mills A Areas with 2 6 Pulp Mills A Areas with 1 Pulp Mill


No materials flow out of the region

I I


GLASS

GLASS BOTTLES - DEMAND AND SUPPLY OBSERVATIONS Regionally, there is sufficient end-market capacity to handle clear and amber glass bottles recovered through the year 1995. Green bottles are experiencing current and projected near-term market difficulties, although the region does have more than 85 percent of the projected 1995 supply potentially covered. Some mills are making special efforts to utilize green cullet in batches. However, the overall trend has been that green glass furnaces have been closing - with only five now present in the region (in Illinois and Pennsylvania).

The greatest concentrations of glass end market capacity are in Illinois, Indiana and Pennsylvania at nearly 75 percent of the MACRO regional total. Additional capacity exists in Missouri, Wisconsin and Michigan. Glass bottles also go to West Virginia, New Jersey and Oklahoma.

Demand for green (as well as the other colors and mixed cullet) could increase as second-tier markets come into play. Recent studies have identified nearly 20 different end uses for glass cullet beyond the traditional closed loop-bottle manufacturing. One of the more promising uses is as a construction aggregate - representing a very localized, low-transportation cost market altemative. Wide-spread adoption of this potential solution to the glass cullet market problem will require further development of performance standards and specifications for cullet-based aggregate materials. Regionally, clear glass is projected at 25 percent recovery in 1995 and 57 percent in 2000. Brown glass is projected at 28 percent recovery in 1995,53 percent in 2000. Green glass is projected at 31 percent recovery in 1995,56 percent in 2000.



CLEAR GLASS BOTTLES

Projected Regional Supplies of Clear Glass Bottles (Tons) - 1995

Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Michigan 12] Minnesota 12] Missouri 12] Nebraska North Dakota Ohio k2] Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin [21 MACRO Region

1995 Quantity Generated

579,114 170,634 93,850 28,824

104,295 610,734 226,274 143,000 50,423 1 8,474

268,287 358,298 22,311

137,259 2,811,778

1995 Projected

Supply 88,364 13,333 47,381 9,524 6,110

266,829 24,25 1 7,254 3,533 3,335

68,123 62,695

936 106,620 705,360

1995 End Market

Demand [l]

340,000 240,000

0 0 0

55,000 55,000

110,000 0 0

55,000 290,000

0 55,000

1,200,000

1995 End Market Surplus

(Deficit)

25 1,636 226,667 (47,381)

(9,524) (6,110)

(21 1,829) 30,749

102,746

(3,533) (3,335)

(13,123) 227,305

(936) 15 1.620)

Notes: [l] RRS projections of glass cullet capacity, not consumption. Projections are combined to protect proprietary information. Furthermore,

[2] States with less than three glass manufacturing plants. Aggregate projected capacities for these states have been averaged to protect they assume aggressive usage of green and brown cullet in clear bottle fumaces, and of green cullet in brown bottle fumaces.

proprietary information.

Projected Regional Supplies of Clear Glass Bottles (Tons) - 2000


2000 Quantity

Generated

580,887 172,590 96,587 29,543

104,680 610,827 232,504 147,500 49,761 17,770

272,339 359,990 22,065

142,046 2,839,089

2000 Available

Supply

416,336 138,072 47,381 9,524

58,388 266,829

63,426 11 8,000 39,809 12,495

208,320 92,726 19,858

127,842

2000 Minimum End Market

Demand

340,000 240,000

0 0 0

55,000 55,000

1 10,000 0 0

55,000 290,000

0 55.000


327,973 124,739

0 0

52,278 0

39,175 110,746 36,276 9,160

140,197 30,031 18,922 21.222

1,619,004 I 1,200,000 I 910,719


(76,336) 101,928 (47,381) (9,524)

(58,388) (21 1,829)

(8,4261 (8,000)

(39,809) (12,495)

(153,320) 197,274 (19,858: (72,842:

(4 19,004)

Prepared by Resource Recycling Systems for the Mid-America Council of Recycling Officials with a grant from the U.S. EPA.


Mid-America Council of Recycling OfPicials

MACRO Region I

GREEN GLASS BOTTLES

Projected Regional Supplies of Green Glass Bottles (Tons) - 1995

1,021,305 I 322,279

Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Michigan f2] Minnesota i2] Missouri E2] Nebraska North Dakota Ohio i2] Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin L21

2000 Quantity

Generated


2000 2000 Minimum Available End Market

Supply Demand

1995 Projected

Supply

245,391 47,s 1 40,802 5,545

28,814 258,039 98,220 34,417 14,770 4,890

88,190 98,595 6,006

60,006 1,031,537

244,642 47,152 39,646 5,380

28,606 258,000 95,588 33,367 14,862 5,055

86,793 98,089 6,143

57.984

153,893 33,496 18,197 4,989

14,063 108,225 20,391 24,092 10,339 3,009

59,027 32,707 5,406

54,006 541,838

46,740 7,007

18,197 4,989 3,315

108,225 12,808 3,861 1,963 1,775

34,733 32,707

468 45.49 1

1995 End Market

Demand

120,000 35,000

0 0 0

5,000 5,000

10,000 0 0

5,000 85,000

0 5 .OOO

270,000

1995 End Market Surplus

(Deficit)

73,260 27,993

(1 8,197) (4,989) (3,315)

(103,225) (7,808)

6,139

(1,963) (1,775)

(29,733) 52,293

(468) (40.49 1 (52.279)

[I] RRS projections of glass cullet capacity, not consumption. Projections are combined to protect proprietary information. Fulthermore,

[2] States with less than three glass manufacturing plants. Aggregate projected capacities for these states have been averaged to protect they assume aggressive usage of green and brown cullet in clear bottle fUmaces, and of green cullet in brown bottle fumaces.


Projected Regional Supplies of Green Glass Bottles (Tons) - 2000


120,000 35,000

0 0 0

5,000 5,000

10,000 0 0

5,000 85,000

0 5 .OOO

270,000


107,153 26,489

0 0

10,748 0

7,582 20,231 8,376 1,234

24,293 0

4,938 8,515

219,558


(33,893) 1,504

( 18,197)

(4,989) (14,063)

(103,225) (15,391) (14,092) (10,339) (3,009)

(54,027) 52,293 (5,406)

(49,006) (271,838)




1995 End Market

Demand

AMBER GLASS BOTTLES

Projected Regional Supplies of Amber Glass Bottles (Tons) - 1995 1995 End

Market Surplus (Deficit)

Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Michigan Minnesota L2] Missouri L2] Nebraska North Dakota Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin 35,000 MACRO Region 636,712 I 178,879 I 405,000 I


10,477 226,121

131,877 23,124 21,372 9,075

13,806 139,078 5 1,528 38,133 8,266 2,442

116,566 47,181 3,007

31,257

I MACRO Region I 644,439 I 363,688 I 405,000

1995 Projected

Supply

I 184,809 41,312

24,937 3,806

10,077 2,720 1,755

59,757 6,748 1,963

785 897

21,944 18,656

312 24,523

2000 Quantity

Generated

2000 2000

Supply Market Demand

Available Minimum End

100,000 110,000

0 0 0 0

35,000 70,000

0 0 0

55,000 0


58,021 12,753

0 0

5,085 0

13,642 25,570 5,038

575 57,272

0 2,262 4,590

75,063 106,194 (10,077)

(2,720) (1,755)

(59,757) 28,252 68,037

(785) (897)

(21,944) 36,344

(312)


17,042 93,441

(10,077) (2,720) (6,840)

(59,757) 14,609 42,467 (5,823) ( 1,472)

(79,216) 36,344 (2,574)

5,888

132,28 1 23,656 21,995 9,3 19

14,014 139,099 52,947 39,333 8,3 19 2,392

118,355 47,521 2,861

32,347

Notes: [l] RRS pmjections of glass cullet capacity, not consumption. Projections are combined to protect proprietary information. Fulthermore,

[Z] States with less than three glass manufacturing plants. Aggregate pmjected capacities for these states have been averaged to protect they assume aggressive usage of green and brown cullet in clear bottle furnaces, and of green cullet in brown bottle fumaces.


82,958 100,000 16,559 110,000 10,077 0 2,720 0 6,840 0

59,757 0 20,391 35,000 27,533 70,000 5,823 0 1,472 0

79,216 0 18,656 55,000 2,574 0

29,112 35,000

Projected Regional Supplies of Amber Glass Bottles (Tons) - 2000


Prepared by Resource Recycling S-vstems for the MidAmerica Council of Recyrling Q$fi&& ~ $ h p a p j from the US. EPA.


Mid-America Council of Recycling: Ofticials

State

North Dakota Pennsylvania South Dakota Michigan, Minnesota,

NOTES: 1995 AND 2000 GLASS END-MARKET DEMAND ESTIMATES

Number of Facilities

0 6 0

6 ~ 1

General Comments

These end-market demand capacity projections focus on glass bottle melting capacity of glass bottle manufacturers as the dominant source of demand for post-consumer glass bottles and jars. Fiberglass, glasphalt, glass aggregate and other end-markets also consume some glass cullet, though these amounts are typically very small in this region. However, their future potential is significant.

The future level of demand for glass bottles by glass bottle manufacturers is predictable only to a certain extent. Any projection of future demand is complicated because the quantity of cullet (post-consumer glass) used in any given glass furnace may vary from 0-80 percent, and because the color composition of cullet varies depending upon the color of glass bottle made and the type of furnace used. Furthermore, the usage of cullet is dependent largely upon economic factors, and is relatively unconstrained by technology. Finally, it must be noted that these estimates are of cullet demand capacity, not of actual cullet consumption.

Number of Glass Bottle Manufacturing Facilities, MACRO Region

Number of Facilities

Illinois Indiana Iowa

I Missouri, Ohio, Wisconsin [l] To protect proprietary information, the number of glass bottle manufacturing facilities in Michigan,

Minnesota, Missouri, Ohio and Wisconsin was combined.

Reference Sources

A11 States: Domestic Glass Container Manufacturing Plants, Glass Packaging Institute, 1993.

All States: RRS Telephone Survey of Glass Bottle Manufacturing Facilities, May 1993.

IL, IN, MI, MN, MO, OH, PA, WI: Natalie Roy. Glass Packaging Institute. Personal Communications. May-June 1993.

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, July 1992. IN, MI, MN, MO, OH, WI: Resource Management Associates, Glass Container Markets in Wisconsin,


*

I \ J

Kansas Missouri*

1- n.-.-L---

I St Louis area is rent dimctty to end-msrka milla and is not pcoceaped at the MRF locations.

Legend

A Areas with 6-1 0 Cullet Melting Facilities A Areas with 2-5 Cullet Melting Facilities A Areas with 1 Cullet Melting Facility


+ Regional recyclables flowing to facilities out of region


METAL

STEEL CANS - DEMAND AND SUPPLY OBSERVATIONS Steel cans represent a strength of the MACRO region. There is strong demand for steel cans (including bi- metal cans) throughout much of the region, with a concentration in Indiana (58 percent of demand). Ohio, Pennsylvania and Illinois are also major demand sources for cans. The demand for steel cans is expected to strengthen further as can consumption by mini-mills and iron foundries increases over the next several years.

The situation remains favorable in 2000, despite expected increases in supply (35 percent recovery in 1995 and 73 percent recovery in 2000). The region is a net importer of cans and will likely remain unchanged.

ALUMINUM CANS - DEMAND AND SUPPLY OBSERVATIONS Aluminum cans also represent a strength for the MACRO region. There is strong demand for aluminum cans throughout much of the region, with a concentration of end-markets in Kentucky and Indiana. Aluminum cans, when crushed, are shipped long distances; therefore, the lack of end-markets for any particular MACRO state does not imply a lack of demand capacity.

Recovery within the region is particularly strong in Iowa and Michigan, both of which have deposit legislation, although the average recovery rate in 1995 will already be strong at 54 percent with an estimated 73 percent recovery rate in the year 2000.

In the year 2000, the strong demand situation will continue especially given that substantial exports are also likely. Cans recovered in the region also go to Alabama, Colorado, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Georgia and New York.




STEEL CANS Projected Regional Supplies of Steel Cans (Tons) - 1995

1995 1995 End Projected Market

Supply Demand


Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin

126,491 37,590 18,459 16,675 22,869

153,077 69,981 95,333 1 1,566 4,041

187,045 78,464 4,899

51,910

68,357 10,262 12,499 7,254 5,265

4 1,886 18,282 5,395 7,067 2,457

57,075 50,074

780 31,146

136,000 408,000

15,000 0

50,000 36,000 64,000

0 1,000

0 1 10,000 125,000

0 47,000

I MACRO Region I 878,399 I 317,798 I 992,000 Note: The Steel Recycling Institute will have state-by-state estimates of steel can recovely . - estimates are not currently available from the industry.

674,202 1994. Stateby-state

Projected Regional Supplies of Steel Cans (Tons) - 2000


Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin


67,643 397,738

2,501 (7,254) 44,735 (5,886) 45,718 (5,395) (6,067) (2,457) 52,925 74,926

15,854 (780)

MACRO Region Note: The Steel Recyclin, are not currently available

2000 Quantity

Generated

126,878 38,093 19,020 17,067 23,004

153,355 7 1,989 98,333 1 1,465 3,900

189,672 78,842 4,813

53.423 889,854

2000 Available

Supply

90,937 30,475 15,216 7,254

12,831 93,813 57,591 78,667 9,172 2,742

145,085 50,074 4,332

48,081 646,269

2000 Minimum End

Market Demand

136,000 408,000

15,000 0

50,000 36,000 64,000

0 1,000

0 110,000 125,000

0 47 .OOO


22,580 20,212 2,7 17

0 7,566

5 1,927 39,310 73,272 2,105

285 88,010

0 3,552

16,935

I


45,063 377,525

(216) (7,254) 37,169

(S7,8 13) 6,409

(78,667) (8,172) (2,742)

(35,085) 74,926 (493 32) (1,081)

345,731 992,000 I 328,471 rom the industry.

Prepared By Resource Recycling Systems for the Mid-America Council of Recycling Officials with a grantfrom the U.S. EPA.


Mid-America Council of Recycling Omcials

ALUMINUM CANS

Projected Regional Supplies of Aluminum Cans (Tons) - 1995



129,734 39,080 7,503

11,661 23,802 32,898 27,071 47,667 1 1,922 4,222

96,872 8 1,724 5,114

38,184 557,455

1995 Projected

Supply

64,867 19,540 7,128 5,830

11,901 30,595 13,536 23,833 6,557 2,111

48,436 40,862 2,557

25,965 303,719


85,000 320,000

0 0

160,000 0 0 0 0 0

50,000 0 0

1,500 616,500


20,133 300,460 (7,128) (5,830) 148,099 (30,595) (13,536) (23,833) (6,557) (291 11)

1,564 (40,862) (2,557)

(24,465) 312,781

Projected Regional Supplies of Aluminum Cans (Tons) - 2000 2000

Quantity Generated

Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky

Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin

Michigan

130,132 39,607 7,747

1 1,945 23,93 1 33,182 27,898 49,167 1 1,808 4,073

98,321 82,164 5,025

44.255 MACRO Region I 569,253

2000 Available

Supply

93,269 3 1,686 7,128 5,830

13,348 30,595 22,319 39,333 9,447 2,864

75,208 40,862 4,522

39.830 416,240

2000 Minimum End

Market Demand

85,000 320,000

0 0

160,000 0 0 0 0 0

50,000 0 0

1.500 616,500


28,401 12,146

0 0

1,447 0

8,783 15,500 2,890

753 26,772

0 1,965

13.865 112,521


(8,269) 288,3 14 (7,128) (5,830)

146,652 (30,595) (22,3 19) (39,333) (9,447) (2,864)

(25,208) (40,862) (4,522)

(38,330) 200,260




NOTES: 1995 AND 2000 METALS END-MARKET DEMAND ESTIMATES

General Comments

Steel cans (including bi-metal cans) collected in the Mid-America region are sent to approximately 32 steel mills and iron foundries throughout the region.

Aluminum used beverage cans (UBCs) collected in the Mid- America region are sent to approximately two dozen aluminum can melting operations throughout the Country. Nationally, there is currently more end- market melting capacity for UBCs than aluminum cans sold.

Many of the UBCs collected in the Mid-America region are exported to states outside of the region. UBCs are exported to a particularly large facility in Sheffield, Alabama (Reynolds Metal Company), and other facilities in Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia and Colorado.

Number of Metal Can End-Markets, MACRO Region

Reference Sources

State Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Missouri Nebraska North Dakota Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota Wisconsin

Steel Cans 6 5 1 0 1 2 3 0 1 0 7 4 0 2

Aluminum Cans 2 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1

All States: State of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources: Supply and Demand Study for Recyclable Metal Cans. 1992. This report was prepared by Resource Recycling Systems, Inc., in conjunction with David R. Smith and RecycleWorlds Consulting. Background research used to prepare the report is included in this analysis.

All States: RRS Telephone Survey of steel can and aluminum can end-markets. May 1993.

All States: Industrial Users of Steel Can Scrap - Steel and Detinning Companies: Geographic Listing. Steel Can Recycling Institute. 1993.


Projected Major End-Markets for Steel Cans

I ,,

Illinois

*The maprity d material "vered from the St. M o area ia rent dimctht to

-

to New York

A A - Missouri* Kentucky / to Tennessee to Texas \\\-- end-marka milb and io nci &ed at the MRF locations.

J

-0 Georaia

to Alabama \= Legend A Areas with 1 Aluminum Can

Melting Facility Major Processing Areas

-+ Regional recyclables flowing to facilities out of region


PLASTIC

HDPE BOTTLES - DEMAND AND SUPPLY OBSERVATIONS Regionally, there is projected to be sufficient washing capacity to handle HDPE bottles recovered through the years 1995 and 2000. The greatest concentrations of washing capacity are in Iowa, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Michigan at over 54 percent of the MACRO regional total. Additional capacity exists in Wisconsin, Illimois, Minnesota and Missouri. HDPE bottles also go to New Jersey, New York and Oklahoma.

The primary market issue of HDPE is that much of this available capacity is not used in part because of low prices for recycled HDPE resins - driven by low prices for virgin HDPE resins. Thus much of the region’s HDPE washing capacity is not fully utilized because prices for HDPE resin are too low to justify full operation of the washing machines or to attract the necessary supply.

It is assumed, however, that current and planned washing capacity will be operating nearer to capacity by 1995. This assumption is based on current efforts by virgin resin manufacturers to raise the price for virgin HDPE resin (making post-consumer HDPE resin more price attractive), and on efforts at the national and state levels to increase the use of post-consumer HDPE by product manufacturers. Regionally, HDPE recovery is projected at about 41 percent in 1995, with increases up to 67 percent by year 2000.

PET SOFT DRINK BOTTLES - D-EMAND AND SUPPLY OBSERVATIONS Regionally, there is projected to be sufficient washing capacity to handle PET bottles recovered through the year 1995 and the year 2000. Strong PET washing capabilities exist in both Michigan and Ohio (nearly half of region capacity in 1995). Missouri, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are also active. PET bottles also are shipped to New Jersey, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee and New York.

PET washing capacity is expected to expand significantly to meet the rapidly growing demand for post- consumer PET resin. This demand is being driven by expanding end-use options for post-consumer PET, by resin prices that generally favor post-consumer PET resin over virgin PET resin, and by an expanding capability to supply high-quality, post-consumer PET resin. Regionally, PET recovery is projected at about 47 percent in 1995, with increases up to 70 percent by year 2000.



I MACRO Region I 319,782 I 132,589 I 253,000 I

HDPE Bottles Projected Regional Supplies of HDPE Bottles (Tons) - 1995

120,411


Kentucky


Michigan


1995 Projected

Supply

1995 End Market

Demand[']

38,920 13,411 24,340 8,498 8,092

65,854 33,360 19,067 4,406 1,414

49,467 27,678

1,726 23.550

28,257 4,358 6,791 3,175 1,560

18,554 8,023 2,392 1,767 1,112

21,546 19,945

312 14.800

20,000 9,500

53,500 0 0

30,000 26,500 10,000

0 0

55,000 22,500

0 26.000


(8,257) 5,142

46,709 (3,175) (1,560) 1 1,446 1 8,477 7,608

(1,767) (191 12) 33,454 2,555 (312)

11.200

Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky


Michigan

2000 Quantity

Generated

39,039 13,621 25,060 8,699 8,172

65,999 34,322 19,667 4,396 1,372

50,199 27,781

1,681 24.750

2000 Available

Supply

28,257 9,535

17,542 3,175 3,988

35,327 24,025 13,767 3,077 1,112

33,599 19,945 1,513

22.275 217,136

2000 Minimum End Market DemandIl]

20,000 9,500

53,500 0 0

30,000 26,500 10,000

0 0

55,000 22,500

0 26,000

253,000 MACRO Region I 324,757


0 5,177

10,752 0

2,428 16,774 16,002 1 1,375 1,310

0 12,052

0 1,201 7,475

84,546

s assumed


(8,257) (35)

35,958 (3,175) (3,988) (5,327)

2,475 (3,767) (3,077) (1,112) 21,401 2,555

(1,513) 3,725

35,864 : washing capacity in each state. It is assumed

that bottle washing capacity is a proxy for actual end-market demand by manufacturers using post-consumer resin.

?repared by fPeso;;rce Recyctizg Systemsfor the Mid-America Cuuncii uf iiecyciing Gjficiais wuh a grant from the US. EPA.


Mid-America Council of Recycling Offtcials

MACRO Region 202,923 [l] End-mal

I 95,637 I 230,000 I 134,363

PET Soft Drink Bottles

1995 End Market

Demandll]

18,500 9,000 3,500

0 0

67,500 15,000 20,000

0 0

50,000 20,000

0 26,500

Projected Regional Supplies of PET Soft Drink Bottles (Tons) - 1995 1995 End Market Surplus (Deficit)

9,938 7,225

(9,217) ( 1,706) (1,058) 36,059 10,703 15,710 (1,570)

(177) 31,106 16,410

21,160 (219)


145,043 MACRO Region 205,803 I ~


85,041

28,542 5,917

14,961 5,686 3,526

33,808 8,595

14,300 2,113

590 62,980 1 1,968

729 9.210

1995 Projected

Supply

8,5 62 1,775

12,717 1,706 1,058

31,441 4,297 4,290 1,570

177 18,894 3,5 90

219 5,340

Projected Regional Supplies of PET Soft Drink Bottles (Tons) - 2000


2000 Quantity

Generated

28,629 6,005

15,402 5,817 3,581

33,883 8,855

14,750 2,123

576 63,844 1 1,940

708 9,690

2000 Available

Supply

17,954 4,203

13,862 1,706 1,748

31,441 6,199

10,325 1,570

355 42,73 1

3,590 637

8,721

2000 Minimum End

Market Demand[’]

18,500 9,000 3,5 00

0 0

67,500 15,000 20,000

0 0

50,000 20,000

0 26,500


9,392 2,429 1,145

0 690

0 1,901 6,035

0 178

23,837 0

419 3,381

230.000 I 49.406

s assumed


546 4,797

(10,362) ( 1,706) (1,748) 36,059 8,801 9,675

(1,486) (355) 7,269

16,410

17,779 (637)

Prepared by Resource Kecychg Systems for the Mid-America Council oJ”Recyciing 08ieiais wuh a g r a d from the US. EPA.



State

NOTES: 1995 PET AND HDPE END-MARKET DEMAND ESTIMATES

General Comments

As this approach focuses on the stage of “washing” as the “pinch point” of the post-consumer plastic process, only facilities which wash post-consumer PET and HDPE bottles were considered. Given the volatility of post-consumer plastic resin demand by final manufacturers, it is only possible to give “ballpark” estimates of what actual 1995 post-consumer throughput might be. Furthermore, it is not possible to say definitively what future investment in this industry might unfold, as facility expansions may be planned and implemented in a relatively short time. For this analysis, the end-market demand for post-consumer plastics in 1995 is assumed

HDPE BottleFET Soft Drink Bottle Washing

Facilities

to be equivalent to projected activity of existing resin washing facilities.

Number of Plastic Bottle Washing Facilities, MACRO Region

State

Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Michigan

Missouri Nebraska

regional recyclable material prospectus for the 14 mid-american … · 2018. 6. 13. · an appeal...

Documents