98-689 ENR

CONTENTS FOR THIS SECTION

Table 2. Exports of Municipal Solid Waste, 1997 (in tons)
Table 3. Net Imports/Exports of Municipal Solid Waste,1997 or latest year (in tons)

Total Shipments
States Reporting Increased Imports
States Reporting Decreased Imports
Major Exporters
Net Imports and Exports
Additional Information

Table 2. Exports of Municipal Solid Wate, 1997 (in tons)

^a Preliminary 1997 estimate, as reported to the state's Legislative Commission on Solid Waste Management by New York exporters. Six importing states report teceiving a combined total of 5,450,000 tons of waste from New York in 1997.
^b CRS estimate based on partial information.
^c 1996 data.
^d As reported by four receiving states(Michigan, Kentucky, Ohio, and Illinois). Indiana reported 205,422 tons of exports, but noted that the amount was incomplete because it only counted exports from transfer stations.
^e 7/1/96-6/30/97.
^f Connecticut also exports from transfer stations an unspecified amount of waste that originates in New York state.
Source: CRS, based on telephone interviews with and data provided by state program officials.

Table 3. Net Imports/Exports of Municipal Solid Waste,
1997 of latest year (in tons)

Source:CRS, based on telephone interviews. Data subject to numerous qualifications: see notes from Tables 1 and 2.

Data obtained from these contacts are summarized in Tables 1, 2, and 3, and Figures 1 and 2. Table 4 presents additional information, including the names and telephone numbers of state contacts.

Total Shipments

The data show that total interstate waste shipments continue to rise: imports in the current survey totaled 25.1 million tons, about 12% of the 210 million tons of municipal solid waste generated in the United States.3 Between the current survey (reporting generally 1995 data) and our 1995 report (reporting largely 1993 data), imports increased 6.0 mlllion tons, about 32%. Part of this increase results from more complete data; comparing states with data for both time periods, imports increased 4.8 million tons, or 25%.

One of the weaknesses of the available data is that total imports reported by the states do not match total exports. When one totals reported exports, the current survey shows a national total of 21.9 million tons, about 12% less than reported imports. Reported exports increased 4.2 million tons, or 24%, compared to 1995.

States Reporting Increased Imports

Twenty of the states reported increased imports, the largest being Indiana, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.

Pennsylvania continues to be the largest waste importer, by far. Disposal facilities in the state received 6.3 million tons of MSW and 2.4 million tons of other nonhazardous waste from out of state in 1997. The amounts represented 40% of all solid waste disposed in the state and more than one-fourth the national total for interstate shipments.

After Pennsylvania, Virginia and Indiana were the largest importers, with 2.8 million and 2.1 million tons of MSW imports respectively. Indiana also imported nearly 600,000 tons of non-municipal solid waste, primarily construction and demolition waste and industrial waste. In both Virginia and Indiana, imports increased by more than 1 million tons between 1995 and 1997.

In other highlights:

· nine states reported imports exceeding one million tons per year in 1997, an increase from five states in 1995;

· another 20 states had imports exceeding 100,000 tons;

· for the first time in more than a decade, New Jersey joined the list of major importers, with 650,000 tons of MSW imports. The state is still a major exporter of waste, as well, but the absence of flow control has led waste-to-energy facilities in the state to search for waste to replace local waste now being disposed elsewhere. As a result, large amounts of waste are entering New Jersey from New York;

· the Chicago area appears to have become a major source of exported waste, despite ample disposal capacity in Illinois. Both Wisconsin and Indiana report record amounts of waste imports, mostly from Illinois. Illinois, meanwhile, continues to import more than I million tons per year, chiefly from Missouri.

States Reporting Decreased Imports

While waste imports increased overall, 13 states did report declines in waste imports. In 4 cases (Ohio, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia), the decline exceeded 100,000 tons.

Ohio and West Virginia have shown consistent declines in imports over a sustained period. In Ohio's case, imports have fallen from an estimated 3.7 million tons in 1989, to 1.0 million tons in 1997, a decline of more than 70%. 4 Shipments of waste to West Virginia have declined 68% from their peak in 1992, to about 255,000 tons.

Major Exporters

Five states New York, Illinois, New Jersey, Maryland, and Missouri) exported more than one million tons of waste to facilities in other states in 1997, and five other states and the Canadian province of Ontario exported more than half a million tons. New York remains the largest exporter; but the number two spot, long occupied by New Jersey, was taken over by Illinois, whose exports appear to have nearly tripled in the last 2 years.

New York reported exports of 3.77 million tons of MSW in 1997, a decline of 2% from 1995. The state's exports, which account for probably one-fifth of all interstate shipments nationally, are dominated by commercial waste generated in New York City. The private haulers who collect this waste are free to dispose of it where they wish, and are generally thought to be motivated by the cost of disposal (tipping fees plus transport costs) at competing disposal sites. These are believed to be the dominant factors that led 2.7 million tons of MSW from New York to Pennsylvania in 1997, and major amounts to Virginia, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Ohio, as well.

Many observers believe the actual total of New York's exports to have been substantially higher than that reported by the state. The state's Legislative Commission on Solid Waste Management notes that its 1997 estimate, based on data provided by exporting jurisdictions, "differs substantially from the total of tonnages reported/estimated by importing states,"5 which is approximately 5.45 million tons.

Further, despite the already large amount, waste exports from New York are expected to grow rapidly because of the planned closure of New York City's Fresh Kills Landfill the city's only landfiil - in 2001. Contracts for the disposal of New York City's municipally collected garbage (nearly 5 million tons per year, most of which now goes to Fresh Kills) may be awarded before the end of 1998.

Ilinois' exports, at 2.8 million tons in 1997, are also growing rapidly: they were nearly triple the amount reported for 1995.6 Most of the exports originate in Cook County (Chicago and its suburbs), which has a shortage of disposal capacity. Illinois as a whole reported a 3 1% increase in capacity in the latest available year, and now has nearly double the disposal capacity it had in 1987. But Chicago is located near the border of both Indiana and Wisconsin, so increases in capacity elsewhere in Illinois may not affect disposal decisions in the metropolitan area.

New Jersey's estimated exports, 2.4 million tons, remained within the range of previous years' exports. Like New York, however, the state may be on the verge of a major increase. In New Jersey's case, the cause of increased exports would be the overturning of the state's flow control law, which, until recently, directed much of the state's waste to high-cost local facilities for disposal. The state law was overturned and the state exhausted its appeals in October 1997.

Maryland, in fourth place among exporters, is situated near large amounts of low-cost disposal capacity in Virginia. The state's exports have increased ninefold, from 200,000 tons in 1993 to 1.8 million in 1997.

Net Imports and Exports

Table 3 combines import and export data to rank the states by net amounts imported or exported. The table shows that 19 states (Pennsylvania, Virginla, Indiana, Kansas, Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Kentucky, Connecticut, Ohio, and West Virginia among the net importers, and Georgia, Iowa, Texas, North Carolina, Massachusetts, Washington, Illinois, New Jersey, and New York among net exporters) both export and import in excess of 100,000 tons of municipal solid waste.

There are several factors at work here. In the larger states, there are sometimes differences in available disposal capacity in different regions within the state. Areas without capacity may be closer to landfills (or may at least find cheaper disposal options) in other states. A good example is Illinois: the Chicago area, which is close to two other states, exports significant amounts of waste out of state, despite Illinois being a large waste importer with available capacity in other parts of the state.

The movement of waste also represents the growing regionalization and consolidation of the waste industry. In 1996, the three largest firms (Waste Management, BFI, and Republic Industries) accounted for more than 50% of total industry revenues.7 These firms offer integrated waste services, from collection to transfer station to disposal site, in many locations. Ofien, they ship waste to their own disposal facility across a border, rather than dispose of it at an in-state facility owned by a rival. As small landfills continue to close - the number of U.S. landfills declined 46% between 1993 and I 997g - this trend toward regionalization and consolidation is likely to continue. The amount of waste being shipped across state lines for disposal may rise in this process.

Additional Information

The remainder of this report consists of a table summarizing waste import and export data, by state. The states for which we were able to develop information are listed in alphabetical order, with data for amount of waste exported, destination of exports, amount of waste imported, source of imports, and a state agency contact for additional information. States not shown are believed not to be major importers or exporters of waste.

ENDNOTES

3 Because many of the larger importers now differenctiate MSW from other non-hazardous waste imports, we compared total MSW imports to EPA's national estimate of MSW generation (210 million tons in the latest available year, 1996). State-reported waste generation, summarized in BioCycle magfazine's annual survey, is substantially higher(340 million tons in 1997), but is likely to include other nonhazardous waste provided it was disposed at MSW facilities. For state-reported data, see Rebert Steuteville, "The State of Garbage in America," BioCycle, April 1998, p.32.

4 Exports from Ohio, meanwhile, have grown to 902 thousand tons in 1996, nearly triple the amount in 1993, 50 that Ohio, which was once the nation's largest net importer of waste, now imports and exports nearly equal amounts.

5 Personal communcation, Pat Golden, New York Legislative Conimission on Solid Waste Management, June 5, 1998.

6 Illinois like most states, does not report waste exports. This export estimate was derived from data provided by Indiana and Wisconsin.

7 Bethany Barber and John T. Aquino, "Waste Age 100," Waste Age, September 1997, pp.36-37.