TM 5-814-5
Table 1-1. Typical Composition of Municipal Solid Wastes
Percent by mass
Component
Range
Typical
Food wastes
6-26
14
Paper
15-45
34
Cardboard
3-15
7
Plastics
2-8
2
Textiles
0-4
0.5
Rubber
0-2
0.5
Garden trimmings
0-2
12
Wood
0-20
2
Miscellaneous organics
0-5
4
Glass
4-16
4
Tin cans
2-8
4
Nonferrous metals
0-1
4
Ferrous metals
1-4
4
Dirt, ashes, brick, etc.
0-10
4
Reprinted, with permission, from Peavy, Rowe, Tchobanoglous, Environmental Engineering, 1985, p. 577, by McGraw-Hill Book
Company.
clude incineration with energy recovery, recycling
expenditure of energy, before it results in a reusable
of suitable materials, and composting organic mat-
form. Recyclable materials include paper, plastics,
ter.
glass, metals, batteries, and automobile tires.
b. Comparison of Alternatives.
Incineration with energy recovery has been used for
(1) Sanitary landfilling is generally preferred
some time, but has come under increased scrutiny
over other alternatives, because there is less han-
because of new laws and regulations aimed at
dling and processing of materials. However, a
reducing air pollution and the resulting products of
landfill may not be the most economical or envi-
incineration may be even more dangerous than
ronmentally preferred method. The rapid filling of
originally thought. Clean air laws, and negative
available sites, and outdated containment systems of
public sentiment may require additional expense and
existing landfills have forced authorities to consider
waste treatment that can make incineration the least
alternative disposal methods. A combination of the
favored alternative. Ash residue and bulky refuse
options listed above may be the best solution, but
which are not burned during incineration will still
may depend on several factors at the installation,
require disposal. The main advantage of
including: the type of refuse, availability of land for
incineration is the capability to reduce landfill use
site selection, incinerator accessibility, economic
by 70-80%.
feasibility for recycling usable materials, suitable
(3) The critical factors which must be consid-
locations for large quantity composting, and
ered include: the possibility of surface and ground-
possible contractual arrangements that would
water contamination, explosions from gases gener-
combine several of these methods.
ated by waste decomposition, airborne ash from
(2) The main advantage of a sanitary landfill is
incineration, odors from the composting process,
that handling and processing of refuse is kept to a
and the lack of suitable sites with the capacity for
minimum. Handling is limited to the pickup and
long term use are critical factors which must be
transport of the waste, the spreading of refuse, and
considered. Design authorities must make decisions
covering with a suitable cover material. Composting
which are critical to the areas surrounding the
requires more handling before it is stored to
proposed sanitary landfill. Selecting a method for
decompose, and may only be suitable for disposing
proper and complete disposal can be a very intricate
of organic matter such as yard waste. Therefore,
process.
composting may not be a viable alternative for a
1-9. Solid Waste Stabilization in a Sanitary
majority of the situations. Recycling requires that
Landfill.
only specific materials be processed, and requires
more handling than most other methods, but can
a. Alternatives. While past designs required that
reduce solid wastes in a landfill by as much as 30%.
landfills receive extended maintenance after closure,
After the material is collected, it may go through
increasingly stringent regulations and the shrinking
various changes and processes, at a substantial
availability of suitable sites for landfills may force
1-3
Previous Page
