Guide Five.-That "recyclable" and/or the recyclable logogram be defined and applied as a label only to those products that are designed to be recycled or reused and also will likely be recycled under current economic and technological conditions. The Commission has not yet reached a final decision on these guides, however, their actions to date have exhibited interest and concern for preserving the integrity of resource recovery as well as protecting the interests of the consumer. Mr. ROGERS. How about packaging standards that would make a package more easily reclaimed? Have you gotten into that question at all? Mr. DOMINICK. We have not made specific recommendations on that point. It is one of the most complex that we have dealt with. Do you want to add to that, Arsen? Mr. DARNAY. There is an on-going effort within the Federal Government led by the Navy which is examining its own packaging efforts with the objective of reducing its packaging consumption by 50 percent by 1975 and by 75 percent by 1980. We have had dealings with the Navy on this subject, trying to give them assistance. Our own studies have been aimed at the reduction of total packaging consumption via broader types of measures such as taxation measures, and we have some studies that we have launched to examine the effectiveness and viability of such methods. These are discussed in our research recovery report. Mr. ROGERS. But you don't make any recommendations as to whether we should effect any change of policy on taxation? Mr. DARNAY. Not at this time. Mr. ROGERS. You simply state the proposition? Mr. DARNAY. Yes. Mr. ROGERS. What did you say was the percentage of waste in beverage containers? Mr. DARNAY. Beverage containers are, I believe, 5 percent. Mr. ROGERS. About 5 percent. Mr. DARNAY. Of the municipal waste, plastic Mr. ROGERS. Plastic? Mr. DARNAY. Plastics are less than 1 percent. Mr. ROGERS. Automobile hulks? Mr. DARNAY. Automobile hulks-Well, I have some figures, Mr. Chairman, on the number of abandonments and I could translate those into tonnages for you for the record. Mr. ROGERS. All right. If you will submit that for us for the record. [The following information was received for the record:] ABANDONED AND UNPROCESSED AUTOMOBILES There are presently approximately 13 million retired vehicles in the United States that are unprocessed and unrecycled. Of that total, approximately 10 million can be found in auto wrecker's graveyards and 3 million lie uncollected and derelict on public and private lands. The retired automobile represents more than 23 million tons of waste with a total metal fraction of 89 percent and a ferrous metal fraction of 71 percent (Table 1). Table 1 summarizes the composition of a typical automobile and estimates the potential mineral resources available. The automobile waste problem can be set in perspective by comparing it to the estimates of total municipal and industrial waste generation in 1971 (excluding autos), of 370 million tons (230 million tons municipal and 140 million tons industrial). The metallic portion of the municipal waste stream is estimated between 8 and 12 percent, no estimates are available for the metallic fraction of the industrial waste stream.. Mr. ROGERS. So in summary then, as I understand it, you are proposing a reduction in the budget from some $36 million to $6 million, a reduction in personnel from 312 to 120, only a program of research on hazardous waste, and that would be the total effort of the solid waste program of EPA. Mr. DOMINICK. We will continue present efforts on our demonstration programs mandated by the Congress. We will continue our technical Mr. ROGERS. I didn't know you were going to fund any more demonstration projects. Mr. DOMINICK. We will continue with those that have already been funded. Funding will carry them through to completion. Mr. ROGERS. You are not carrying Menlo Park through to completion. You just stopped the funding there. Mr. DOMINICK. We stopped that for what we considered to be very good reasons. Mr. ROGERS. I don't know what the reasons are. What I am saying is that you did not carry it to completion. I think it might be well to give us for the record all of these projects and when they are definitely completed and what funding goes until when. [The following table was revised for the record:] RESOURCE RECOVERY AND RELATED DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS (c) CPU 400 (Menlo Park, Calif.) Pilot. 5,800,000 1974 Other ongoing projects which could easily be modified to obtain a promising resource recovery system: (a) Torrax (Erie County, N.Y.)... 1 Not available at this time. 93-217 O-73-5 Mr. ROGERS. Now you say they are all going to be funded to completion. Do you mean with your present money? You are going to give them just a lump sum? Mr. HALE. Even in the case of Menlo Park, our current contract with Combustion Power is only for construction and evaluation of the pilot plant. We have that all funded through the completion. Mr. ROGERS. I was out there last year and they told me it didn't look like you were going to fund them to completion. Mr. HALE. Their concern is what will happen in terms of funding a full-scale demonstration. Mr. ROGERS. You are just doing that little pilot thing and not the demonstration project. How is the community going to pick that up unless you have the demonstration project? Mr. HALE. Our feeling is that, versus the other kinds of demonstration applications that we have received, the CPU model at this point is just simply neither technologically nor economically as good as are many others. Mr. ROGERS. I think we had better have a description of each, the evaluation, the results, and what they would mean to a community to adopt them. If we could have that for the record. [The following material was received for the record:] COMPARISON OF RESOURCE RECOVERY OPTIONS The following is a final report done by the Midwest Research Institute, "Resource Recovery Processes for Mixed Municipal Solid Wastes," which compares generic kinds of resource recovery options-both technically and economically. In summary, the report states that from a technological standpoint, heat recovery from incinerators and composting is currently fully developed. These options are followed, in order of extent of development, by fuel recovery, steam generation processes, and electrical power generation. Under the conditions used in this generalized economic analysis, the process ranking by lowest net cost is (1) fuel recovery, (2) materials recovery, (3) pyrolysis, (4) composting, (5) steam genera tion with incinerator residue recovery, (6) steam recovery, (7) incinerator residue recovery, and (8) electrical energy generation. Thus, concepts which meet the objective of recovery of energy from solid wastes (e.g., fuel recovery at St. Louis; pyrolysis at Baltimore) appear to have reached a further stage of development (generally with a significant input of private capital), and economically more attractive than the CPU 400 concept. Of course, specific projects which are under evaluation in the selection of awards for Section 208 recovery projects were evaluated in greater detail. The CPU 400 project, to which you refer, had not reached the stage of development where it was considered as a proposed system by any applicant. RESOURCE RECOVERY PROCESSES FOR MIXED MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTES PART I--TECHNICAL REVIEW AND ECONOMIC ANALYSIS This final report (MRI--Project No. 3634-D) was prepared by WILLIAM E. FRANKLIN, DAVID BENDERSKY, LARRY J. SHANNON, AND WILLIAM R. PARK for the Council on Environmental Quality and is reprinted by the Office of Solid Waste Management Programs U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 1973 PREFACE This report was prepared for the President's Council on Environmental Quality, under MRI Project Nos. 3523-D and 3634-D. The purpose of these projects was to review and assess the technology for recovery of resources from mixed municipal solid wastes. The results are presented in two parts. Part I consists of a review and analysis of the technical and economic aspects of resource recovery processes. Part II is a compilation of basic data on 40 current and emerging resource recovery processes. The project officer for the Council on Environmental Quality was Mr. Eric Zausner. Valuable guidance and information was furnished by Messrs. Arsen Darnay and Stephen Levy of EPA's Office of Solid Waste Management Programs, Resource Recovery Division. Furthermore, the cooperation of the organizations that furnished information on their resource recovery processes is gratefully acknowledged. The project leader for the MRI team was Mr. William E. Franklin, Senior Environmental Economist. The technical analyses were carried out by Mr. David Bendersky, Principal Engineer, and Dr. Larry J. Shannon, Principal Chemical Engineer. The economic analyses were carried out by Mr. Franklin and Mr. William R. Park, Principal Economist. Mr. Gary Nuss, Assistant Director of the Economics and Management Science Division, administered the project. Approved for: MIDWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE John Malory John McKelvey, Vice President |