Tab 13-2 Estimated distribution of all components of msw generated in a typical community excluding industrial and agricultural wastes Percent by weight Waste category° Range Residential and commercial, excluding special and 620 hazardous wastes Special(bulky items, consumer electronics, white 50 oods, yard wastes collected separately, batteries Hazardous 0.01-1.0 0.1 Institutional 3-5 Construction and demolition 8-20 140 Municipal services Street and alley cleanings 2-5 Tree and landscaping 2-5 30 Parks and recreational areas 15-3 20 Catch basin 0.5-1.2 0.7 Treatment plant sludges 38 Total 1000 Residential Portion of Msw in the United States. Components that typically make up the esidential portion of Ms w, excluding special and hazardous wastes, and their relative distribution are eported in Table 13-3. Although any number of components could be selected, those in Table 13-3 ave been selected because they are readily identifiable and consistent with component categories eported in the literature and because they have proven adequate for the characterization of solid wastes for most applications. The data in Table 13-3 are derived from both the literature and the authors experience. For the purpose of comparison, the percentage distribution of the materials used for packaging is reported in Column 3 of Table 13-3. It is estimated that packaging wastes now account for approximately one-third of the residential and commercial MSW The values given in Table 13-3 for food waste, plastics, and yard wastes are considerably different from the values given in the corresponding table in the predecessor of this text, published in 1977 The differences are due largely to(1)improved food processing techniques and the increased use of kitchen food waste grinders, (2)the increased use of plastics for food packaging and other packaging, and (3)the fact that burning of yard wastes is no longer allowed in most communities Effect of Waste Diversions on Distribution of Components in Residential Msw To assess the impact of waste diversions(resulting from the use of food waste grinders and waste cycling programs)on the distribution of waste components, the distribution given in Table 13-3 fo as collected residential MS w must adjusted. The adjusted component distribution data are reported in Table 13-4. As shown in Table 13-4, the distribution data for the United States do not change significantly. On the other hand, the distribution data for the city of Davis, California, would change quite a bit more because of the higher percentage of recycling13-6 Tab 13-2 Residential Portion of MSW in the United States. Components that typically make up the residential portion of MSW, excluding special and hazardous wastes, and their relative distribution are reported in Table13-3. Although any number of components could be selected, those in Table 13-3 have been selected because they are readily identifiable and consistent with component categories reported in the literature and because they have proven adequate for the characterization of solid wastes for most applications. The data in Table 13-3 are derived from both the literature and the authors' experience. For the purpose of comparison, the percentage distribution of the materials used for packaging is reported in Column 3 of Table 13-3. It is estimated that packaging wastes now account for approximately one-third of the residential and commercial MSW. The values given in Table 13-3 for food waste, plastics, and yard wastes are considerably different from the values given in the corresponding table in the predecessor of this text, published in 1977 . The differences are due largely to (1) improved food processing techniques and the increased use of kitchen food waste grinders, (2) the increased use of plastics for food packaging and other packaging, and (3) the fact that burning of yard wastes is no longer allowed in most communities. Effect of Waste Diversions on Distribution of Components in Residential MSW To assess the impact of waste diversions (resulting from the use of food waste grinders and waste recycling programs) on the distribution of waste components, the distribution given in Table13-3 for as collected residential MSW must adjusted. The adjusted component distribution data are reported in Table 13-4. As shown in Table 13-4, the distribution data for the United States do not change significantly. On the other hand, the distribution data for the city of Davis, California, would change quite a bit more because of the higher percentage of recycling