An Overview of Recycling Systems By: August Urban Abstract This report overviews current recycling protocols and practices

for recycling facilities, including a basic analysis of how various common recyclables are processed. This article analyzes plastics, paper products, metals, and organic waste reprocessing methods and landfill usage. The positive and negative effects of recycling programs are also reviewed, weighing economic and social aspects alongside environmental impacts. Two examples of recycling programs operating in Contra Costa-Solano counties in California are also included. Section One Current Recycling Protocols and Practices When one is considering the efficiency of a given recycling system, it must be taken into account how effective the current processes are. It should be observed that recycling companies are employing cost-effective, efficient programs to deal with the specific type of recycling material they are processing. Improvements should be made if necessary to maximize profit while keeping cost and environmental impact as low as possible. A general path that recyclable materials follows from consumption to processing into new products would be similar to this: A consumer finishes with a product that is made of recyclable materials and disposes of it into a designated collection apparatus, such as a tote bin or dumpster. The contents of the tote bin are collected by truck and sent off to a recycling center along with other recyclables to be sorted. Once arriving at the recycling center, the recyclable material is sent through a maze of conveyor belts. Groups of workers and machines sort the various types of material into appropriate collection troughs. Once sorted, the material is loaded into a compacting machine that presses large amounts of recyclable material into great bales weighing upwards of 1,200 pounds. Once the material is baled, it is sold and shipped along with more bales of the same material to a secondary facility where it will be recycled and reprocessed into new products for consumption by the public. (As per com, John Ryan, Lisa LeFebvre, 2013).

With a sorting stations various processes, however efficient, there can be room for improvement. One such example is the process of human sorting of materials. While somewhat effective, it is not always the fastest or safest procedure. Most injuries at recycling centers occur on the sorting line, where workers prick themselves on sharp objects such as a hypodermic needle (John Ryan, Pacific Rim Recycling, 2013). This problem can be eliminated by the replacement of human sorters with automated machines. Technology exists in the near future where robots outfitted with specialized optical sensors and grasping parts can quickly process and sort a variety of materials in place of their human equivalent. This also makes room for higher productivity, as properly outfitted machines can handle a larger sorting task in less time than a human. Many materials are deemed non-recyclable for a number of reasons. Perhaps there is no considerable Return on Investment (ROI) for the products that could be manufactured from the recycled materials due to the complex makeup of the original product. In this situation, simply recycling the original product would require expensive, lengthy processes and massive pieces of machinery simply to separate the product into appropriate amounts of recyclable material. With current technology, recycling products that have a complex makeup is simply deemed financially infeasible (Lisa LeFebvre, Recology, 2013). Along with the recyclable material that a sorting station receives, there is an amount of non-recyclable waste that the facility cannot process with its current technology. This is usually household waste, such as kitchen garbage or other organic material. This is often included in the recycling totes of citizens due to public misconception about what is recyclable. Since the waste cannot be sorted, it is shipped off to a landfill or other waste disposal facility. Section Two Effects of Recycling Programs Recycling programs are designed to minimize the environmental impact of waste management while using as little virgin material for product manufacturing as possible. Activities within waste management systems, such as energy and material recovery, can lead to indirect environmental impacts that occur outside of waste management systems. Heat, power, and biogas can be recovered from recycling and waste management systems and subsequently

absorbed by markets for energy carriers. These material and energy flows can give rise to both direct and indirect environmental impacts (Soderman, 2003). Economic benefits and social factors are also key players in how well a recycling program can function. There are direct and indirect environmental impacts that result from waste treatment within the waste management system. These direct impacts occur as results of treatment options used, such as collection, transport, source separation, central separation, composting, anaerobic digestion, incineration and landfilling. An example is the Global Warming Potential (GWP) caused by greenhouse-gas emissions from incineration, transport, composting, and landfilling. Indirect environmental impacts take place in systems outside the waste management system as results of activities within the primary system. These impacts occur when material and energy flow to and from the waste management system (Soderman, 2003). Power recovery is one benefit of waste management systems. Energy can be recovered from waste by thermal treatment, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas collection and converted into electricity. The power generated can be distributed to a larger grid where it becomes available to external users and can be used instead of power produced by other sources. Thus, the GWPs of other power production can be avoided, such as the polluting process of electricity generation by a coal-burning power plant (Soderman, 2003). Heat recovery is another benefit of properly run waste management systems. This process works in a similar fashion to power recovery, as heat is recovered from waste by thermal treatment, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas collection. Once recovered, the heat can be made available for space and water heating through a district-heating network and can be used instead of district heat produced in other facilities (Soderman, 2003). An example of heat recovery is shown in Sweden, where nearly all energy that is recovered from waste is currently used for space and water heating (Soderman, 2003). A third recovery method beneficial to waste management systems is that of biogas recovery. Biogas can be recovered from organic waste through anaerobic digestion and landfill gas collection (such as described earlier). Once recovered, biogas can be used as a vehicle fuel to replace fuels of fossil origin, such as diesel and natural gas. Thus the Global Warming

Potential of using vehicles with other fuels would be avoided. However, biogas can be used for other purposes than for fueling vehicles. For example, it can be combusted in gas turbines to produce heat and power. In this case, recovered biogas would replace other district heat and power production (Soderman, 2003). A fourth method of recapture in waste management systems is material recovery. Once reprocessed, recovered materials can be used for producing new products and can replace the use of other materials. In the study of material recovery, it is assumed that recovered materials replace virgin materials of the same type; the impacts of producing virgin materials are then avoided (Soderman, 2003). For example, recovered plastics could be used for producing construction materials that otherwise would have been produced from virgin wood. A secondary alternative is that another recovered material of the same type is replaced. It can be argued that recycling programs in waste management systems are helpful to the environment for a number of reasons. Recycling programs are often claimed to reduce the environmental impact of human activity by reducing pollution (and thus carbon footprint), conserving natural resources (recovery efforts), reducing landfill use (landfill diversion), and conservation of energy (recovery efforts). Along with these environmental benefits, there are economic benefits of recycling programs as well. An example of an economically beneficial recycling program was introduced in the United Kingdom in October 1996. The UK government introduced the Landfill Tax as a fiscal measure to ensure that landfill waste disposal is priced so as to reflect its environmental cost and to help promote a more sustainable approach to waste management. The Landfill Tax was introduced in order that a proportion of the money raised by the tax could be directed for use in certain types of environmental projects which complement the objectives of the Landfill Tax (Grigg et al., 2001). Along with the cost reflecting environmental impact, the Landfill Tax also promoted a more sustainable approach to waste management in which less waste is produced and more waste is either reused or has value recovered from it (Grigg et al., 2001). There are social factors affecting how the public complies with a program designed to sustainably manage household waste and recycle what is possible. In order for processes

proposed for household solid waste management to be successful, it is essential to investigate social factors affecting the publics behavior during their implementation. Sustainable management of household waste is a challenging task. A central purpose is a shift in the publics behavior in order to minimize the volume of their waste combined with an increase in recycling. In a study of social factors affecting recycling programs, four social capital parameters were taken into consideration: social trust, institutional trust, social networks, and compliance with social norms. In the conclusions of the study, it is underlined that enforcement of social factors may significantly affect individuals perceptions and environmental behavior during the final implementation of the recycling policy (Jones et al., 2010). While recycling programs are designed to minimize the environmental impact of waste management while using as little virgin material for product manufacturing as possible in order to minimize environmental impact, they can still have negative effects on the environment. Recycling programs can still be polluting, and if improperly managed, they can be environmentally destructive as well. One example of an environmentally harmful recycling process is incineration. Incineration, as mentioned earlier, is essentially a pre-treatment process to reduce the volume of solid waste before landfilling the residue, as well as a potential source of revenue from combined heat and power installations (Garrod et al., 1998). While it reduces the amount of solid waste to be landfilled, there are three types of discharge from incinerators that create actual or perceived problems. The first of which is stack emissions. Stack emissions, such as dioxins and furans, acid rain, greenhouse gases, mobilized heavy metals and particulates all have potential impacts on community health and agricultural production. The second is waste water from the quenching of high temperature residue which contains high concentrations of heavy metals and other water pollutants. Third is the residual ash, which contains a high concentration of non-combustible substances. In addition, the process of incineration has a visual impact due to the requirements for high stacks discharging visible smoke and vapor (Garrod et al., 1998).

Achieving ecological or environmental sustainability is closely linked to the manner in which we deal with the waste products that society generates. It is apparent that the mass of waste products released to the atmosphere as molecular-waste in the industrialized countries greatly exceeds the amount of solid waste generated per capita (Klang et al., 2003). Studied material flows in a number of industrialized countries showed that one half to three quarters of the annual material input to these societies was returned to the environment as waste within a year. Even so, closing material cycles by re-use and recycling does not necessarily result in ecological sustainability (Klang et al., 2003). Section Three Reprocessing Various Recyclable Waste Forms & Possible End Products In the waste stream, there are various types of recyclable materials that can be reprocessed into new products or incinerated to generate electricity, among other solutions. The variety of recyclable waste types falls under five major categories: plastics, paper products, metals, glass, and organic waste. Each has a specific recycling process. Plastics have a multitude of applications and make up a sizeable amount of recyclable materials in the waste stream. Its low density, strength, user-friendly design, fabrication capabilities and low cost drive it to be widely used. Waste plastics collected from the solid waste stream is a contaminated, assorted mixture of a variety of plastics. This makes their identification, separation, and purification very challenging (Subramanian, 2000). Plastics are usually processed by way of mechanical and chemical recycling once they are sorted. The following is a general procedure that plastic follows when being processed by mechanical recycling. First, the post-consumer material is granulated into small pieces (<10mm) and then is washed in warm water (60 C) with constant agitation for two hours. The material is allowed to settle and the floating material (high-density polyethylene) is removed and dried in an oven (80 C) for six hours. This process leaves a clean polymer product that is completely dried and devoid of contaminants (Ambrose, 2002). Another approach to the process of plastics recycling is by way of chemical recycling. Chemical recycling involves the generation of monomers in high purity from plastic wastes to

easily enable the re-manufacturing of plastics. Such recycling methods include glycolysis, ammonolysis, and pyrolysis. Glycolysis is the chemical process in which glucose is converted into pyruvate; an organic acid. Ammonolysis is a chemical reaction where ammonia is resolved into other compounds by being a source of hydrogen and amidogen. Pyrolysis is the thermochemical decomposition of organic materials at elevated temperatures in the absence of oxygen. These chemical methods represent a significant technological advancement that could supplement existing mechanical recycling techniques. These are often called advanced recycling, feed-stock recycling, or chemical recycling (Subramanian, 2000). Possible products that can be formed from recycled plastic material includes further use in packaging, automotive and industrial applications, healthcare, and construction applications (such as plastic lumber) among many others. Paper products follow a different trend of recycling once sorted. Initially, paper is source separated and then collected, further selected to eliminate contaminations, and baled by municipalities to be shipped to a proper recycling facility, such as a paper mill. When the bales of paper products (already separated by type) arrive at a paper mill, they are inserted into a great pulping vat containing water and chemicals. The pulper heats, shears, and reduces the paper into a fibrous mixture, or pulp. The resulting pulp is then forced through various screens which remove contaminants. The paper mill cleans the pulp by centrifugal force in large cylinders. Once cleaned, the pulp undergoes a de-inking process to remove printing ink and other contaminants. Afterwards, the pulp is refined and beaten to make the fibers swell, then stripped of coloring dyes and bleached (if required). Finally, the pulp is mixed with water and chemicals to be made into paper products once again. Various types of metals are recycled in a similar way to other recycling procedures. However, metals must be sorted according to chemical and physical properties to avoid contamination. Once collected and sorted, metal is pressed into large bales and shipped to a designated recycling center. The baled metal is shredded into small particles for ease of processing. Once shredded, the metal is melted in a furnace specific to the metal type (depending upon its properties). The molten metal can then be purified using a variety of

methods, mainly by electrolysis. Upon cooling, the recycled metal can be transported to factories for use in the production of new metal products. Glass is a unique material in that it can be recycled infinitely without losing strength or quality. Initially, glass is separated depending upon chemical composition or color. Once sorted, the glass is cleaned and crushed into fine pieces. After crushing, the glass pieces are combined with silicate, sodium carbonate, and calcium carbonate in a furnace. The resulting molten material can then be mechanically blown or molded into new glass products. Recycled glass can also be used to manufacture products such as aggregate, insulation, and ceramic ware among other products. Organic waste has various end products and uses in recycling. As households discard organic waste (such as kitchen waste- food scraps, organic matter, and other biodegradable materials), it is usually placed in a tote specified for municipal solid waste or organic waste to be collected. If an amount of organic waste that is collected is composed purely of organic matter (classified as noncombustible green waste) it can be sent to a digestion plant for manufacturing into biofuels, which can be used as a cleaner alternative fuel source. Anaerobic digestion of biodegradable waste can produce biogas. The biogas produced can be used as fuel for heavy vehicles such as trucks and buses. Remaining digestion residues are to be composted and then used as nutrient rich soil for park and construction purposes (Klang, 2008). Organic materials can also be composted or mulched for use in soils and fertilizer (Klang, 2008). Often times, companies that generate a large amount of organic waste will support on-site composting to maximize productivity. If a given amount of organic waste does include combustible materials (such as dry plant matter) it can be sent to an incinerator as fuel, or to a landfill. Incineration of biodegradable and other combustible household waste supplies heating and electricity to its operating district (Klang, 2008). Organic waste containing combustibles can be composted, but this runs a risk of contamination. While many materials listed above may be recycled, many others end up going to a landfill. This is the most expensive process for disposal of waste, and thus is a driving force for the quest to find new ways to recycle materials once classified as waste.

There are various types of landfills, each specified for a certain composition of materials. Types of landfills include municipal solid waste landfills, sanitary landfills, construction / demolition waste landfills, and industrial waste landfills. The most common is a Municipal Solid Waste landfill, specializing in general household kitchen waste and garbage that cannot be recycled. Some biodegradable matter is often included in Municipal Solid Waste landfills, but more recently green waste is being harnessed for biofuels instead of being dumped to decompose on its own. Landfills that specifically collect construction and demolition waste deal with a number of hazardous materials. Asbestos mats, PCB-contaminated joint compositions, CFC-gases in cooling installations, and many other harmful materials are often dealt with in these landfills. Regardless of economic feasibility, these materials and substances must be taken care of properly to minimize environmental damage. Companies will always seek to maximize profits. In order to promote re-use and recycling, it is often necessary to point out the economic benefits of such operations. One way is through legislative demands, which include landfill taxes. Landfill taxes are an example of an enforcement measure to make sure that companies are making the most environmentally ideal alternatives also economically optimal from a business perspective (Klang et al., 2003). Landfill taxes are designed as an incentive for companies to dispose of their waste in more responsible, less expensive ways (such as recycling). Italy has employed a landfill tax to support landfill diversion alongside structural and economic forces (Mazzanti et al., 2013). Regions that have increased the use of such landfill taxes have improved waste disposal performances over time, diverting more waste to other disposal programs as opposed to sending it to a landfill. Landfill taxes are not the only instrument policy makers might introduce, but they seem to play a relevant role in the evolution of Italian waste disposal performances (Mazzanti et al., 2013). In order to minimize the amount of non-recyclable materials going into a landfill, materials must be reduced in some way. Incineration is a way to solve this problem. In a study conducted in the UK, Incineration was used as a pre-treatment process to reduce the volume of

solid waste before landfilling the resulting residue. It was also a potential source of revenue from combined heat and power installations harnessing the incinerators output (Garrod et al., 1998). The quality of waste brought to landfills is important. A municipal landfill in Torino, Italy, was studied by having waste samples from varying depths of the landfill drilled out for analysis. It was discovered that the landfills biogas generation can be affected by what the landfill contains. Specifically, water lenses can form inside of the landfill. Water lenses are relatively small bodies of water that form when runoff and moisture collect in a given area under the surface of the landfill. Water lenses were shown to raise the moisture level, and strongly influence the biodegradation rate of organic matter. Therefore, by affecting organic matter degradation rates, water lenses are affecting biogas generation and composition (Chiampo et al., 1995) In most landfills, the waste and refuse deposited usually has a high content of organic matter, such as household, industrial, and garden waste. Immediately after the refuse has been placed in the landfill, aerobic decomposition of the organic waste begins. Once the oxygen has been exhausted, anaerobic decomposition begins. Biogas is produced with a methane content of approximately 50% and can be harnessed as fuel. A landfill gas plant consists of a recovery system and a production system. A recovery system can consist of vertical perforated pipe wells, horizontal perforated pipes or ditches, or membrane covers to collect the generated gas. In the United States, only power is produced from landfill gas plants. In Europe the waste heat is normally exploited, making the plant function as a combined power and heating plant (Willumsen, 1989). Externalities with landfills include the production of greenhouse gases, toxicity and health problems associated with the discharge of leachate to surface or ground water, and the noise, visual, and odor impacts during the operational phases of the landfill (Garrod et al., 1998). One key factor dealing with landfills is time perspective. A short landfill time perspective in principle covers decomposition of easily degradable materials. Most landfill models assume the landfilled material to be basically inert after this time frame. However, a longer time

perspective assumes that landfill decomposition will continue and cause environmental impact until all material contained within the landfill has spread to the environment (Finnveden et al., 2005). Section Four Examples of Recycling Programs While collecting data on recycling systems, the choice was made to tour two recycling facilities in close proximity to Benicia, California. The first recycling facility toured was Pacific Rim Recycling, located at 3690 Sprig Drive, Benicia, California. The tour was given by John Ryan, whose formal job title was not obtained. The second recycling facility toured was Recology Vallejo, located at 2021 Broadway St, Vallejo, California. The tour was given by Lisa LeFebvre, whose formal job title was also not obtained. Pacific Rim Recycling in Benicia, California, processes common household recyclables and varying grades of plastics. Pacific Rim does not process wet waste, wood, clothes, or any non-recyclable plastics. Anything that cannot be processed on site is sent to other companies. Standard recycling protocol for Pacific Rim follows the recycling-sorting process as described earlier in Section One of this paper. Re-quoted here: Once arriving at the recycling center, the recyclable material is sent through a maze of conveyor belts. Groups of workers and machines sorting the various types of material into appropriate collection troughs. Once sorted, the material is loaded into a compacting machine that presses large amounts of recyclable material into great bales weighing upwards of 1,200 pounds. Once the material is baled, it is sold and shipped along with more bales of the same material to a secondary facility where it will be recycled and reprocessed into new products for consumption by the public. (As per com, John Ryan, Lisa LeFebvre, 2013). This process is repeated twice for all material that Pacific Rim receives, as to ensure that there are very few pollutants in the sorted material. Pacific Rim has a 90% materials capture rate, meaning that only 10% of the recycling waste that they process must be sent to a landfill or other facility to be processed. The material that presents the biggest challenge to process is plastic bags; as a material with a very low density, several thousand are required to produce one bale (1200 pounds each). The material

that is the most profitable for Pacific Rim to process is paper and paper products. This is the most profitable due to sheer amount as 70% of the recycling waste that Pacific Rim processes is waste paper (As per com, John Ryan, 2013). Pacific Rim processes recycling waste from the following sources: 99% residential waste (equating to around 160,000 homes in their service area) and 1% commercial waste. Pacific Rims services deal with recycling waste collected from central Contra Costa County, Benicia, and a small portion of Fairfield, California. Allied Waste and Waste Management are the two companies that collect waste for Pacific Rim Recycling. The two collection companies do not share an absolutely equal split in collection effort, but are fairly close (As per com, John Ryan, 2013). Of the recyclable products that Pacific Rim processes and sells by the metric ton, there are various destinations for final recycling procedures. Paper and cardboard products go to China, tin products go to Oregon, and aluminum and plastic products are sent all over the Midwest United States (As per com, John Ryan, 2013). A large variety of products can be manufactured from the recycled waste. Plastic products, such as soda bottles, can be manufactured into plastic lumber. Many construction companies will use heavier plastics for road base in place of sand. Aluminum, glass, and paper products can be remade into the same products nearly indefinitely. The market price for all recyclable products changes on a weekly basis, the most profitable being paper and aluminum due to sheer volume (As per com, John Ryan, 2013). Government regulations on environmental impact from recycling processes have affected Pacific Rim Recyclings materials intake. Pacific Rim receives more material to be processed due to guidelines stating that cities must divert more material from landfills to recycling centers (As per com, John Ryan, 2013). In the waste stream, there are things that could be recycled but are not due to financial infeasibility. Clothes, carpet, and other complex materials could be recycled but massive facilities would be required to do so. Therefore, it is not considered economically feasible to capture and recycle everything. However, as automation becomes more useful and prevalent in

the recycling field, technology could be used to streamline recycling systems and maximize productivity (As per com, John Ryan, 2013). Recology Recycling in Vallejo is a much larger facility than Pacific Rim, easily twice its size with a much greater storage and materials processing capacity. Recology processes a multitude of materials, following the general recycling-sorting process described earlier in Section One. At Recology, this process is repeated at least twice, sometimes more to remove all possible contaminants from the materials. Recology processes newspaper, cardboard, aluminum, glass, paper products, metals, plastics, and general household recyclables. The material with the biggest processing hassle for Recology is glass, as it is tricky to keep contaminants out of the sorted product. Glass is the only material that Recology must pay for other companies to remove, while all other processed materials are sold for profit. The most profitable material that Recology processes is aluminum, as it carries the highest market value along with a California Redemption Value (CRV). The second most profitable material is cardboard/newspaper and other paper products due to sheer volume by which they receive it (As per com, Lisa LeFebvre, 2013). Every city handles recycling protocols differently due to machinery and space available. Recology follows its waste zero motto by trying to find solutions for all the materials it handles, although doing so is a very slow process. Currently, Recology is seeking an organics program where food scraps and yard waste can be converted into compost or biodiesel fuel. Recology accepts waste from Vacaville, American Canyon, Dixon, and Vallejo. The waste collected is mainly residential, though a small amount is collected from commercial businesses. Drivers (garbage trucks) collect material from American Canyon and Vallejo, while other material is delivered from other cities. The commercial waste that Recology receives is mainly cardboard or metal from packaging. Recology has a 90% capture rate, where 90% of the received material at Recology can be sorted and processed for recycling. The rest is sent to the Napa/American Canyon transfer

station for further action. These non-recyclable materials include household/kitchen waste, food scraps, plastic bags, hoses, clothes and other complex materials. After processing at Recology, the bales of sorted material are sent to a variety of locations for actual recycling. One hundred percent of paper products that Recology receives is sent to China. Fifty percent of plastic goes to China, while the other 50% stays in the United States to be recycled. All glass products that Recology processes stay in the US to be recycled (As per com, Lisa LeFebvre, 2013). Products that can be remanufactured from the processed recycling waste are as follows: Plastics can be made into clothes, backpacks, socks, childrens playground equipment, and plastic lumber, among other products. Glass can be made into glass again, as explained in Section Three. Paper can be made into more paper products. Processed materials from Recology are sold by the Imperial ton in large bales of compressed material. The prices of all materials fluctuate often; there have been extreme lows and extreme highs. Due to Chinas Green Fence policy, mixed 337 plastics have been in low demand (As per com, Lisa LeFebvre, 2013). Government regulations on environmental impact from recycling programs have affected Recology negatively in that the bales of material sold must contain no greater than 12% pollutants present, as compared to 10% pollutant acceptance before the policys implementation. This means that Recology must process its received materials at least twice to ensure that there are next to no contaminants present. 337 type plastic has been in such low demand that 500 bales have been shipped off after building up over the period of seven months. Before the Green Fence policy, 337 plastic was shipped once a month. Thus, its sold and moved at a very slow rate. In July 2012, California made it mandatory by Assembly Bill 341, stating that any commercial business that produced greater than 4 yards of trash per week is required to recycle (As per com, Lisa LeFebvre, 2013). In the waste stream, there are many products that could be recycled but currently are not due to financial infeasibility. Some of these products include Styrofoam and carpet. Extra storage space is needed to stockpile the materials until enough are gathered to produce one bale. Over time, weather affects the composition of the plastic used to make the products,

resulting in polluted runoff among other negative environmental effects. Styrofoam would require large pieces of machinery that cannot be accommodated due to cost or space. Much like plastic bags, Styrofoam is lightweight with low density so a large amount of products would be needed to ship out a full load of bales (As per com, Lisa LeFebvre, 2013). Companies and residents can benefit the overall recycling process by sorting materials into their proper receptacles, e.g. recyclable materials into assigned bin, separating metals, plastics, large quantities of non-soiled paper, and other recyclables while minimizing the amount of trash included in the recyclable materials. Section Five Conclusion My report shows that recycling is economically viable. It is an important part of protecting the environment by minimizing the amount of waste ending up in landfills. Current recycling protocols and practices appear to be the most efficient for the near future. As technology advances, recycling facilities can utilize new machines that can replace human workers in some situations. At the moment, recycling companies are employing cost-effective, efficient programs to deal with the specific type of recycling material they are processing. Recycling programs are designed to minimize the environmental impact of waste management while using as little virgin material for product manufacturing as possible. Activities within waste management systems, such as energy and material recovery, can lead to indirect environmental impacts that occur outside of waste management systems. Heat, power, and biogas can be recovered from recycling and waste management systems and subsequently absorbed by markets for energy carriers. These material and energy flows can give rise to both direct and indirect environmental impacts (Soderman, 2003). Economic benefits and social factors are also key players in how well a recycling program can function. In the waste stream, there are various types of recyclable materials that can be reprocessed into new products or incinerated to generate electricity, among other solutions. The variety of recyclable waste types falls under five major categories: plastics, paper products, metals, glass, and organic waste. Each has a specific recycling process. Landfills still play a

significant part in recycling systems as they can often be harnessed for energy long after they have stopped accepting waste. The tours of two recycling facilities provided a first-hand experience about how recycling works once the material has left your home. Data was gathered about standard protocols of these facilities, as well as the type of waste handled and how it is processed for further action. Government regulations in both the United States and foreign countries impact these facilities significantly due to strict regulations. Sources:
Ambrose, C. A., Hooper, R., Potter, A. K., & Singh, M. M. (2002). Diversion from landfill: quality products from valuable plastics. Resources, conservation and recycling, 36(4), 309-318. Barnard, R., & Olivetti, G. (1990). Limiting environmental impact by waste management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 4(1), 51-62. Beigl, P., & Salhofer, S. (2004). Comparison of ecological effects and costs of communal waste management systems. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 41(2), 83-102. Bjrklund, A., & Finnveden, G. (2005). Recycling revisitedlife cycle comparisons of global warming impact and total energy use of waste management strategies. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 44(4), 309-317. Chiampo, F., Conti, R., & Cometto, D. (1996). Morphological characterization of MSW landfills. Resources, conservation and recycling, 17(1), 37-45. Craighill, A. L., & Powell, J. C. (1996). Lifecycle assessment and economic evaluation of recycling: a case study. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,17(2), 75-96. Eriksson, O., Frostell, B., Bjrklund, A., Assefa, G., Sundqvist, J. O., Granath, J., ... & Thyselius, L. (2002). ORWAREa simulation tool for waste management. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 36(4), 287-307. Finnveden, G. (1999). Methodological aspects of life cycle assessment of integrated solid waste management systems. Resources, conservation and recycling, 26(3), 173-187. Fujii, M., Fujita, T., Chen, X., Ohnishi, S., & Yamaguchi, N. (2012). Smart recycling of organic solid wastes in an environmentally sustainable society. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 63, 18. Garrod, G., & Willis, K. (1998). Estimating lost amenity due to landfill waste disposal. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 22(1), 83-95. Goddard, H. C. (1995). The benefits and costs of alternative solid waste management policies. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 13(3), 183-213. Grigg, S. V., & Read, A. D. (2001). A discussion on the various methods of application for landfill tax credit funding for environmental and community projects. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 32(3), 389-409. Jones, N., Evangelinos, K., Halvadakis, C. P., Iosifides, T., & Sophoulis, C. M. (2010). Social factors influencing perceptions and willingness to pay for a market-based policy aiming on solid waste management. Resources, conservation and recycling, 54(9), 533-540. Klang, A. B., Vikman, P. ., & Bratteb, H. (2008). Sustainable management of combustible household wasteExpanding the integrated evaluation model.Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 52(8), 1101-1111. Klang, A., Vikman, P. ., & Bratteb, H. (2003). Sustainable management of demolition waste an integrated model for the evaluation of environmental, economic and social aspects. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 38(4), 317-334.

Ljunggren Sderman, M. (2003). Including indirect environmental impacts in waste management planning. Resources, conservation and recycling, 38(3), 213-241. Lombrano, A. (2009). Cost efficiency in the management of solid urban waste.Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 53(11), 601-611. Mazzanti, M., & Nicolli, F. (2012). Landfill diversion in a decentralized setting: a dynamic assessment of landfill taxes (No. 201205). McBean, E. A., Rosso, E. D., & Rovers, F. A. (2005). Improvements in financing for sustainability in solid waste management. Resources, conservation and recycling, 43(4), 391-401. Ordoez, I., & Rahe, U. (2013). Collaboration between design and waste management: Can it help close the material loop?. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 72, 108-117. Pohjola, V. J., & Pongrcz, E. (2002). An approach to the formal theory of waste management. Resources, conservation and recycling, 35(1), 17-29. Read, A. D., Phillips, P. S., & Murphy, A. (1997). Environmental bodies and landfill tax funds: An assessment of landfill operators in two English counties. Resources, conservation and recycling, 20(3), 153-182. Santos, A. S. F., Teixeira, B. A. N., Agnelli, J. A. M., & Manrich, S. (2005). Characterization of effluents through a typical plastic recycling process: An evaluation of cleaning performance and environmental pollution. Resources, conservation and recycling, 45(2), 159-171. Subramanian, P. M. (2000). Plastics recycling and waste management in the US. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 28(3), 253-263. Taeli, B. K. (2007). The impact of the European Landfill Directive on waste management strategy and current legislation in Turkey's Specially Protected Areas. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 52(1), 119-135. Willumsen, H. (1990). Landfill gas. Resources, Conservation and Recycling,4(1), 121-133. Wilson, E. J., McDougall, F. R., & Willmore, J. (2001). Euro-trash: searching Europe for a more sustainable approach to waste management. Resources, conservation and recycling, 31(4), 327346.