Characterization of Products Containing Mercury in Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1970 to 2000

Transcription

1 United States Solid Waste and OSW# EPA530-R Environmental Protection Emergency Response NTIS# PB Agency (0s-305) April 1992 Characterization of Products Containing Mercury in Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1970 to 2000 Printed on Recycled Paper

2 CHARACTERIZATION OF PRODUCTS CONTAINING MERCURY IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN THE UNITED STATES, 1970 TO 2000 April, 1992 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Solid Waste Municipal and Industrial Solid Waste Division

3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page ES MERCURY IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY 1-1 Health and Environmental Effects of Mercury Natural and Anthropogenic Releases of Mercury Overview of This Report Sources of Mercury in Municipal Solid Waste Household Batteries Electric Lighting Paint Residues Fever Thermometers Thermostats Pigments Dental Uses Special Paper Coating Mercury Electric Light Switches Film Pack Batteries Trends in Discards of Mercury in MSW Discontinued Sources of Mercury in MSW Mercury in Non-Municipal Solid Waste Products Limitations of This Report References MERCURY IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE 2-1 Background Information Mercury and its Compounds Mercury Consumption in Products Sold in the United States Batteries Types of Batteries Discards of Mercury in Batteries in MSW Projections Recovery of Batteries Electric Lighting Paint Residues Fever Thermometers Residential Thermostats Pigments Dental Uses Special Paper Coating Mercury Electric Light Switches Instant Camera Film Pack Batteries Discontinued Uses of Mercury in MSW References

4 Chapter Page 3 MERCURY IN NON-MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE PRODUCTS 3-1 Introduction Agricultural Products Paints Catalysts for Plastics Chlorine and Caustic Soda Production Explosives Laboratory Uses Pharmaceuticals Cosmetics Electrical Apparatus Discontinued Uses of Mercury in Non-MSW Applications References Appendix A MATERIALS FLOW METHODOLOGY B CONSUMPTION OF MERCURY C BACKGROUND DATA ON MERCURY IN BATTERIES D HOUSEHOLD BATTERIES THAT DO NOT CONTAIN MERCURY E WORLDWIDE ANNUAL ANTHROPOGENIC SOURCES OF MERCURY F MERCURY ASSESSMENT IN ALKALINE DRY BATTERIES A-1 B-1 C-1 D-1 E-1 F LIST OF TABLES Discards of Mercury in Products in the Municipal Solid Waste Stream, 1970 to 2000 (In short tons) Discards of Mercury in Products in the Municipal Solid Waste Stream, 1970 to 2000 (In percent of total discards) Consumption of Mercury in the United States, 1980 and 1989 Types of Household Batteries Discards of Mercury in Household Batteries (In short tons) Discards of Mercury in Household Batteries (In percent of total before recovery) Discards of Mercury in Electric Lamps Estimated Mercury in Discarded Paint Residues Discards of Mercury in Thermometers Discards of Mercury in Thermostats Ratio of CdS:HgS in Cadmium-Mercury Pigments Consumption of Cadmium-Mercury Pigments Consumption of Mercury in Pigments in Plastics Discards of Mercury in Pigments Discards of Dental Mercury Mercury Discards in Special Paper Coating iv

5 Page 2-15 Discards of Mercury in Switches 2-16 Discards of Mercury from Instant Camera Film Pack Batteries 2-17 Consumption of Mercury in Paper Manufacture LIST OF FIGURES Discards of mercury in MSW, 1989 Percentage discards of mercury in MSW, 1970 to 2000 Discards of mercury in batteries in MSW, 1970 to 2000 Discards of mercury in MSW, 1970 to 2000 Sources of mercury in combustible and noncombustible MSW products, 1989 Sources of mercury in noncombustible products, 1989 Sources of mercury in combustible products, 1989 Consumption of mercury in the U.S., 1980 and 1989 Flow diagram for discards of batteries containing mercury in MSW Discards of mercury in batteries in MSW, 1970 to 2000 Discards of mercury in electric lighting in MSW, 1970 to 2000 Discards of mercury in paint residues, 1970 to 2000 Discards of mercury in thermometers in MSW, 1970 to 2000 Discards of mercury in thermostats in MSW, 1970 to 2000 Discards of mercury in pigments in MSW, 1970 to 2000 Discards of mercury in dental uses in MSW, 1970 to v

6 CHARACTERIZATION OF PRODUCTS CONTAINING MERCURY IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE IN THE UNITED STATES, 1970 TO 2000 Executive Summary THE PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THIS REPORT The purpose of this report is to identify the products in municipal solid waste (MSW) that may contain mercury and to quantify, to the extent that data are available, the mercury present in these products. Since the data are presented in a time trend (1970 to 1989), the report helps to identify which products in MSW are making declining contributions of mercury and which are increasing. The information in this report can thus be used to identify opportunities for source reduction and removal of mercury from the municipal solid waste stream. As in earlier municipal solid waste characterization reports published by EPA*, the characterization of mercury in MSW relies on a material flows methodology. By definition in the referenced reports, municipal solid waste is generated from residential, commercial, and institutional sources. Some wastes from industrial facilities, such as office waste and packaging, are also included. MSW as characterized in the referenced reports does not include other Subtitle D wastes such as municipal sludges, municipal waste combustion ash, industrial nonhazardous process wastes, small quantity generator wastes, construction and demolition wastes, agricultural wastes, oil and gas production wastes, and mining wastes. Subtitle C (hazardous) wastes also are not included. HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF MERCURY Human Health Effects Mercury is a heavy metal with a high toxicity and strong tendency to bioaccumulate in the food chain. Worldwide, the major route for entry of mercury in humans is ingestion of mercury-contaminated food, especially fish. Long-term exposure, or exposure during developmental stages, to either organic or inorganic mercury can permanently damage the brain, kidneys, and fetuses. Short-term exposure to high levels of inorganic or organic mercury can cause similar health effects, which may be reversible. Pregnant women, fetuses, and children appear to be at highest risk. * The most recent of these reports is Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1990 Update. EPA/530-SW June ES-1

7 Environmental Effects In addition to potential effects on human health, mercury poisoning can also affect other living organisms. Mercury is unique among the metals in that it is consistently biomagnified within the aquatic food chain. Organisms eating mercury-contaminated fish, such as birds, wild mink, and otter, have been found to have mercury poisoning. In addition, several countries have reported poisoning of birds through ingestion of seeds treated with mercury compounds, and of predatory animals through ingestion of contaminated birds. MERCURY RELEASES IN PERSPECTIVE While the products containing mercury in municipal solid waste are an important source of mercury releases in the environment, they are far from the only source. Global releases of mercury in the environment are both natural and anthropogenic (caused by human activity). Relative sources of mercury are shown in Figure ES-1. While global releases are not well documented, the best estimate available is that about 12,000 short tons of mercury are released annually to the air, soil, and water through anthropogenic sources. These sources include combustion of various fuels; mining, smelting, and manufacturing activities; wastewater; agricultural, animal, and food wastes; urban refuse; combustion ash, and other human activities. Global natural sources of mercury include volatilization of gaseous mercury from soils, vegetation, oceans, and other water bodies. The natural sources are thought to release less mercury overall than the anthropogenic sources, but natural atmospheric emissions may be higher than anthropogenic atmospheric emissions. Figure ES-1. Global and United States sources of annual mercury releases. Global Anthropogenic (Human) Sources of Hg Fuel combustion: mining, smelting, manufacturing; wastewater, agricultural, animal, and food wastes: urban refuse; combustion ash. Total annual releases about 12,000 Short tons; probably higher than total natural release. Global Natural Sources of Mercury volatilization of gaseous mercury from soils, Vegetation, oceans, and other water bodies. Natural atmospheric emissions probabiy higher than anthropogenic atmospheric emissions Consumption of Mercury in the United States \ 1989 Discards of Mercury In Municipal solid Waste in the United States ES-2

8 Figure ES-2. U.S. consumption of mercury, 1989 (in short tons) Discards of mercury in products in municipal solid waste in the United States are derived from consumption of mercury, with appropriate adjustments for manufacturing losses, imports and exports of products containing mercury, and the lifetimes of the relevant products. In 1989, an estimated 709 short tons of mercury were discarded in the U.S. in municipal solid waste compared to the 1,338 short tons reported to be consumed in the U.S. the same year (Figure ES-l). The MSW discards are less than consumption because mercury is used in several products and processes that are not discarded as MSW. (The adjustments listed above also partially account for differences between consumption and discards in any given year.) There are several uses of mercury in products and processes that are not classified as MSW discards. The largest use of mercury in the U.S. is in chlorine and caustic soda manufacture (Figure ES-2); mercury wastes from these processes are classified as industrial process waste. Another example is mercury-containing paint that has been applied to indoor or outdoor surfaces. If the structure is demolished, the waste would be classified as demolition waste, not MSW. Many batteries, instruments, and electrical devices containing mercury are used in industrial, communications, transportation, or military applications that also are not classified as MSW. SOURCES OF MERCURY IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE Research performed in the preparation of this report identified a number of sources of mercury in municipal solid waste, with total discards of mercury in 1989 estimated to be 709 short tons. A summary of the results is shown in Tables ES-1 and ES-2, and Figure ES-3. ES-3

9 Table ES-1 DISCARDS* OF MERCURY IN PRODUCTS IN THE MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE STREAM, 1970 TO 2000 (In short tons**) Products Household Batteries Electric Lighting Paint Residues Fever Thermometers Thermostats Pigments Dental Uses Special Paper Coating Mercury Light Switches Film Pack Batteries TOTAL DISCARDS * Discards before recovery. * * Weights in this report are converted to short tons of 2000 pounds. Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd. The tables show that batteries discarded from households and other sources of MSW are by far the largest current source of mercury. Light bulbs, paint residues, thermometers, thermostats, and pigments are estimated to contribute most of the remainder of mercury in MSW. A few other uses, such as dental mercury and light switches, were also identified, but these totaled less than one percent of mercury in MSW in Mercury discards in MSW peaked in 1986, and are declining rapidly (Figure ES-4). In particular, there is projected to be a significant decrease in mercury in alkaline batteries and paint residues over the next few years. The decrease in batteries is due to a long-term commitment to research and development by the battery industry to remove mercury from alkaline batteries. The removal of mercury from paint residues is the result of bans by the Environmental Protection Agency, and voluntary cancellations of registrations by the paint industry, of mercury-based biocides in 1990 and The only products identified to be increasing in total tonnage of mercury discarded are electric lighting and mercury light switches. Fever thermometers and thermostats, while formerly increasing in tonnage discarded, are projected to be fairly stable as sources of mercury. ES-4

10 Table ES-2 DISCARDS* OF MERCURY IN PRODUCTS IN THE MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE STREAM/ 1970 TO 2000 (In percent of total discards) Products Household Batteries Electric Lighting Paint Residues Fever Thermometers Thermostats Pigment Dental Uses Special Paper Coating Mercury Light Switches Film Pack Batteries TOTAL DISCARDS * Discards before recovery. Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd. Each identified source of mercury in MSW is discussed briefly in this section. Household Batteries Batteries containing mercury that are assumed to be discarded into MSW are mostly of two types: Alkaline batteries, which are usually the cylinder-shaped batteries used in flashlights, radios and other electronics, and toys. Mercury-zinc batteries, which are usually in a button form, are used in hearing aids, watches, calculators, cameras, and similar applications. Mercury-zinc cylinder-type batteries are also used in some medical applications that were assumed to be discarded in MSW. A few other kinds of batteries-carbon zinc, silver oxide, and zinc air account for relatively small amounts of mercury in MSW. Alkaline Batteries. Alkaline batteries accounted for about 419 short tons, or over 59 percent, of discards of mercury in MSW in While the ES-5

11 amount of mercury used in each battery has been quite small, the large numbers of alkaline batteries sold have caused these batteries to become the leading source of mercury in MSW. The battery industry has been under intense pressure to reduce the amounts of mercury (and other heavy metals) discarded into MSW. The industry has announced its intention to reduce mercury in alkaline batteries to percent by weight by 1992, and to eventually eliminate all mercury from these batteries. Projections made for this report take these goals into account. Mercury-Zinc Batteries. Mercuric oxide is used as the cathode material in mercury-zinc batteries, so mercury comprises a relatively high percentage of the material in these batteries. They contributed over 196 tons, or nearly 28 percent, of mercury discards in The amount of mercury discarded in mercury-zinc batteries has declined over the years as other kinds of batteries (silver Oxide, zinc air) have taken some of their market share. While mercury can be eliminated from alkaline batteries, it is an integral part of mercury-zinc batteries. Discards of mercury from this source were thus projected to decrease but not be eliminated. Based on the projections, only mercury-zinc batteries will be found in MSW in the year Other Batteries. Other batteries that contributed about 5 tons, or less than one percent, of mercury discards in MSW in 1989 include carbon-zinc batteries, silver oxide batteries, and zinc air batteries. Production of carbonzinc batteries is declining, while use of silver oxide and zinc air batteries has Figure ES-3. Discards of mercury in MSW, 1989 Lighting 3.8% Thermometers 1.6% Paint Residues 2.6% Thermometers 2.3% Pigments 1.4% All Others <1% Total mercury discards = 709 short tons Es-6

12 short tons : Figure ES-4. Discards of mercury in MSW, 1970 to been increasing. It is projected that use of mercury in these batteries will be discontinued. Recovery for Recycling. While some programs to recover batteries, either for recycling or simply to keep them out of the waste stream, were identified, the quantities recovered were not believed to be significant enough to affect discards in It was assumed for this report that 5 percent of the mercury in batteries will be recovered in 1995 and that 20 percent will be recovered in the year These recovery rates are consistent with recovery rates achieved by many other products in MSW, and lower than some. Electric Lighting The second largest source of mercury in MSW in 1989 was estimated to be electric lighting. This mercury came from two sources: The ordinary fluorescent lamps (bulbs) used in residences, offices, and other commercial and institutional buildings Certain high intensity lamps (bulbs) used in lighting streets, parking lots, and similar sites. Of these two sources, fluorescent lamps are by far the largest, accounting for 26 tons of mercury in MSW in 1989, or 3.7 percent of total discards. All lighting sources were estimated to contribute nearly 27 tons of mercury in 1989, or almost 4 percent of total discards. ES-7

13 The mercury content of these lamps has been reduced over the past 5 years, but increasing sales will cause the amount of mercury from this source to continue to increase. New energy-efficient fluorescent lamps are being promoted as a replacement for incandescent lamps at this time, but it is too early to determine whether sales and discards of these lamps will further increase the amount of mercury discarded. While a few attempts to recover mercury from fluorescent lamps were identified, no basis for projecting a significant amount of recovery from lamps in MSW in the future was found. Paint Residues By 1991, EPA had banned the use of mercury as a biocide in paints for exterior or interior use. Even though mercury is no longer used in paint manufacture, paint cans containing residues including mercury will continue to be discarded. It was estimated that about 18 tons of mercury were discarded in paint residues in 1989, or 2.6 percent of total discards. These discards are projected to decline rapidly as paints made after the ban on mercury took effect begin to be discarded. (Note that these estimates do not include mercury in paints applied to interior or exterior surfaces, which are not classified as municipal solid waste.) Fever Thermometers The familiar fever thermometer was identified as a source of mercury discarded from homes and medical establishments. In 1989, an estimated 16.3 tons of mercury were discarded in thermometers, or just over 2 percent of total discards. Mercury fever thermometers are being replaced by digital thermometers, especially in medical applications. It therefore was projected that there will be a gradual decline in discards of mercury from this source. Thermostats The typical thermostat used for temperature control in residences and other buildings contains mercury that could enter MSW if the thermostat is discarded. (This mercury could also become demolition waste if the thermostat is in a demolished house.) An estimated 11 tons of mercury entered MSW in thermostats in 1989; this was less than 2 percent of total discards. Thermostats have a long life-estimated to be 20 years so there is a long lag time before they are discarded. Thus, even though mercury ES-8

14 thermostats are gradually being replaced by digital thermostats, they are projected to continue to be a source of mercury in MSW through Pigments Published data on the end uses for pigments containing mercury was not found. It appears that most of the mercury in pigments is used in plastics, often in combination with cadmium, but other uses could include paints, printing inks, rubber, textiles, and others. Based on the data available, it was estimated that 10 tons of mercury in pigments were discarded in This was less than 2 percent of total discards. Use of mercury in pigments has been declining steadily. Cadmiummercury pigments are no longer manufactured in the United States, but some imports were identified. Since there is continuing pressure on pigment makers to eliminate metals, it was projected that use of mercury in pigments will continue to decline rapidly. Other Sources of Mercury in MSW Other sources of mercury in products discarded in MSW include dental amalgams, a special paper coating used with cathode ray tubes, and mercury electric light switches. Together these uses amounted to less than one percent of mercury in MSW discards in Use of mercury in dentistry is declining, and the manufacturers of the special paper have announced plans to discontinue use of mercury by Of this group, only mercury light switches are a growing source of mercury in MSW. Their discards are projected to total about 2 tons in 2000, or about one percent of total discards in that year. Mercury was formerly a component of batteries used in instant camera film packs, but this use was discontinued in Discontinued Sources of Mercury in MSW Research for this report identified several products that can be classified as MSW where mercury has been used in the past. These sources were not quantified, but are listed below: Mirrors (discontinued about 50 years ago) Glass in highly specialized applications Felt (discontinued in the 1950s) Textiles intended for outdoor use Paper (discontinued about 1972). ES-9

15 MERCURY IN NON-MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE PRODUCTS While the purpose of this report was to quantify sources of mercury in municipal solid waste, other products containing mercury were identified in the research. Some of these wastes could very likely be managed in a landfill or combustor intended primarily for MSW. Agricultural Products Mercury and mercury compounds have been used as fungicides for agricultural purposes. These uses were greatly restricted by FIFRA, and presently only applications for treatment of outdoor textiles, to control brown mold on freshly sawn lumber, to control Dutch elm disease, and to control snow mold are allowed. No use is permitted on food crops. Paints In the past mercury compounds were widely used as biocides or preservatives in paint, especially in latex paints. Mercury was also formerly used in antifouling paints for marine use, but this use was banned in By regulatory action taken in 1990 and 1991, EPA prohibited further use of mercury in indoor or outdoor paints manufactured in the U.S. Paint containing mercury manufactured before the ban may, however, still be discarded as a residue (see above), and demolition waste including mercury in paint will undoubtedly still be discarded. Chlorine and Caustic Soda Production Mercury is used in the manufacturing process for the production of chlorine and caustic soda. In fact, this use was the largest consumer of mercury in the United States in This use was classified as industrial, not MSW. Other Non-MSW Sources of Mercury Other uses for mercury not classified as entering MSW include the catalysis of various plastics, explosives, laboratory uses, residues of pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, and certain electrical apparatus. Discontinued Uses of Mercury A number of non-msw applications for mercury that have been discontinued were identified. These include embalming fluid, photographic development, soap, and wood preservatives. ES-10

16 LIMITATIONS OF THIS REPORT The purpose of this report was to characterize the sources of mercury in municipal solid waste. The characterization applies to the United States as a whole, and should not be construed to be representative of mercury in MSW in a particular locality. Local variations in waste composition and in waste management practices may cause the mercury content at any particular facility to vary from the United States average. In many cases, the amounts of historical, current, and projected mercury in products in MSW are not well documented in any available data source. The estimates in this report are, therefore, often based on assumptions, which are documented in the report. Identification of alternatives and substitutes for mercury in products was not part of the work scope for this report. Information on these topics must come from other sources. ES-11

17 Chapter 1 MERCURY IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE: OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY In the past few years, environmentally-sound disposal of municipal solid waste (MSW) has become a major issue for the United States, especially at the local and state levels. As more and more landfills are closed and new landfills become increasingly difficult to site, communities are seeking alternate methods of disposal. Recovery and recycling of materials and combustion (incineration) of MSW are two management alternatives that are being considered and implemented in many locations. In addition, reduction of both the quantities of municipal solid waste and the toxic constituents of solid waste has received increasing attention at the local, state, and national levels. Mercury has been of particular concern because it has been detected in the emissions from municipal waste combustion facilities and in the ash remaining after combustion. Mercury is also an undesirable contaminant when wastes are managed by other methods such as comporting, recycling, or landfilling. The purpose of this report is to identify the products in MSW that may contain mercury and to quantify, to the extent that data are available, the mercury present in these products. Since the data are presented in a time trend (1970 to 1989), the report helps to identify which products in MSW are making declining contributions of mercury and which are increasing. The information in this report can thus be used to identify opportunities for source reduction and removal of mercury from the municipal solid waste stream. The report projects a dramatic decrease in the amount of mercury discarded to MSW facilities, due in large part to the successful efforts of the battery industry to remove mercury from alkaline batteries. This example emphasizes the effectiveness of source reduction as a strategy for reducing the toxicity of municipal solid waste. HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF MERCURY Human Health Effects Mercury is a heavy metal with a high toxicity and strong tendency to bioaccumulate in the food chain. Worldwide, the major route for entry of mercury in humans is ingestion of mercury-contaminated food, especially fish. Methylmercury in surface waters is rapidly accumulated by aquatic organisms; of mercury therefore, populations eating large amounts of fish can be at risk poisoning (1, 2). 1-1

18 Long-term exposure, or exposure during developmental stages, to either organic or inorganic mercury can permanently damage the brain, kidneys, and fetuses. Short-term exposure to high levels of inorganic or organic mercury can cause similar health effects, which may be reversible (l). Pregnant women, fetuses, and children appear to be at highest risk (2). The type and severity of adverse health effects is dependent upon the form, concentration, and duration of mercury exposure. For example, ingestion of fish contaminated with organic methylmercury may cause greatest harm to the brain and developing fetuses; breathed metallic or organic mercury vapor may cause greatest harm to the brain; and ingestion of inorganic mercury salts may cause greatest harm to the kidneys (l). Environmental Effects* In addition to potential effects on human health, mercury poisoning can also affect other living organisms. Mercury is unique among the metals in that it is consistently biomagnified within the aquatic food chain. Organisms eating mercury-contaminated fish, such as birds, wild mink, and otter, have been found to have mercury poisoning. In addition, several countries have reported poisoning of birds through ingestion of seeds treated with mercury compounds, and of predatory animals through ingestion of contaminated birds. NATURAL AND ANTHROPOGENIC RELEASES OF MERCURY** While the focus of this report is on sources of mercury in municipal solid waste in the United States, there are many other sources of mercury in the environment worldwide. These sources are both natural and anthropogenic (caused by human activity.) A precise determination of mercury in the environment is very difficult (in part because information on emissions in the less developed parts of the world is inadequate), but some data that can be used to place the sources of mercury in context are available. Anthropogenic Releases of Mercury An article by Nriagu and Pacyna in the peer-reviewed journal Nature (3), suggests that global anthropogenic releases of mercury into the biosphere are approximately 11,000 metric tons (approximately 12,000 short tons) per * The information in this section is from the proceedings of a workshop on metal cycling sponsored by the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment of the International Council of Scientific Unions (4). Sources for this section are the proceesings of a workshop on metal cycling sponsored by the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment of the International Council of Scientific Unions (4) and an article in the peer-reviewed journal Nature (3). 1-2

19 year. (See Appendix E for a summary table.) Mercury releases to the atmosphere come mainly from combustion of coal, municipal refuse, sewage sludge, and wood, and from production of metals. Mercury inputs into aquatic ecosystems come from electricity production, manufacturing processes, domestic wastewater and sewage sludge, mining, and fallout of atmospheric emissions. Mercury emissions into soils come from mining and smelting activities, coal fly ash and bottom ash, wood wastes, commercial wastes, sewage sludge, urban refuse, agricultural and food wastes, fallout of atmospheric emissions, and other sources. Natural Sources of Mercury Unlike most of the other heavy metals, natural atmospheric emissions of mercury may be more significant than anthropogenic atmospheric emissions. There is some consensus in the scientific community that the global natural atmospheric emissions are higher than anthropogenic atmospheric emissions of mercury by ratios of 2:1 to 4:1 (6). A summary of an international workshop on metal cycling (2) estimated that annual global atmospheric emissions from natural sources are on the order of 2,700 to 6,000 metric tons (2,980 to 6,600 short tons), while anthropogenic atmospheric emissions are 630 to 2,000 metric tons (690 to 2,200 short tons). The 1988 Nriagu and Pacyna article, however, estimates anthropogenic atmospheric releases at 1,003 to 6,834 metric tons, which suggests that natural and anthropogenic atmospheric releases may be roughly equivalent (3). The natural mercury sources are mainly volatilization of gaseous mercury from soils and vegetation, as well as from the ocean and other water bodies (6). Summary Worldwide measurements of natural and anthropogenic sources of mercury are still imprecise. It appears, however, that global natural atmospheric emissions are higher than or at least equal to anthropogenic atmospheric releases of mercury, but global anthropogenic releases into the biosphere (including inputs into aquatic systems and soils) are greater than natural atmospheric emissions. OVERVIEW OF THIS REPORT This report characterizes mercury in products disposed in municipal solid waste over the time period 1970 to 1989, with projections of disposal to the year A summary of the findings is presented in this chapter. Chapter 2 includes a more detailed discussion of the products in MSW that contain mercury, while Chapter 3 provides a brief discussion of products 1-3

20 containing mercury that are not classified as MSW. (Some of these latter products could, however, be disposed of in a combustor or landfill.) Wastes Included in This Report As defined by EPA in earlier characterization reports (7, 8, 9), municipal solid wastes come from residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial sources. These sources include: Residential wastes Commercial wastes Institutional wastes Industrial wastes Wastes from single and multiple family dwellings, including yard wastes and bulky wastes like appliances Wastes from office buildings, shopping centers, warehouses, restaurants, and the like Wastes from schools, hospitals, prisons, and the like Packaging from assembly plants, wastes from offices and lunchrooms at industrial sites. Wastes Not Included in This Report Other wastes that EPA classifies as Subtitle D (nonhazardous) wastes are not quantified in this report. These wastes include (10): Municipal sludges (e.g., wastewater treatment sludge) Industrial nonhazardous process wastes Small quantity generator waste Construction and demolition waste Agricultural waste Oil and gas production waste Mining waste. Subtitle C (hazardous) wastes are not included in this report. The Material Flows Methodology The material flows methodology, which has been used to characterize MSW in EPA reports for nearly 20 years, is based on production data (by weight) for the materials and products in the waste stream. Adjustments are made for imports and exports and for diversion from MSW (e.g., for products used as building materials). Adjustments are also made for the lifetimes of products. Where relevant, adjustments are made for materials recovered for 1-4

21 recycling. A detailed description of the material flows methodology is included as Appendix A. The term Discards as used in the EPA material flows methodology refers to MSW remaining after recovery has taken place. No significant current recovery of mercury from MSW was identified for this study. Some increase in recovery is assumed for the projections; these assumptions are explained later in the report. SOURCES OF MERCURY IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE Research performed in the preparation of this report identified a number of sources of mercury in municipal solid waste. A summary of the results is shown in Table 1-1 and Table 1:2. Table 1-1 DISCARDS* OF MERCURY IN PRODUCTS IN THE MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE STREAM, 1970 TO 2000 (In short tons**) Products 1970 Household Batteries Alkaline 4.1 Mercury-Zinc Others 4.8 Subtotal Batteries Electric Lighting Fluorescent Lamps 18.9 High Intensity Lamps 0.2 Subtotal Lighting 19.1 Paint Residues 30.2 Fever Thermometers 12.2 Thermostats 5.3 Pigments 32.3 Dental Uses 9.3 Special Paper Coating 0.1 Mercury Light Switches 0.4 Film Pack Batteries 2.1 TOTAL DISCARDS * Discards before recovery. * * Weights in this report are converted to short tons of 2000 pounds. Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd. 1-5

22 Table 1-2 DISCARDS OF MERCURY IN PRODUCTS IN THE MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE STREAM/ 1970 TO 2000 (In percent of total discards) Products Household Batteries Alkaline Mercury-Zinc Others Subtotal Batteries Electric Lighting Fluorescent Lamps High Intensity Lamps Subtotal Lighting Paint Residues Fever Thermometers Thermostats Pigments Dental Uses Special Paper Coating Mercury Light Switches Film Pack Batteries TOTAL DISCARDS * Discards before recovery. Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd. Total discards of mercury in 1989 were estimated to be 709 short tons. Mercury discards in MSW peaked in 1986, and are declining rapidly. In particular, there is projected to be a significant decrease in mercury in alkaline batteries and paint residues over the next few years. The decrease in batteries is due to a long-term commitment to research and development by the battery industry to remove mercury from alkaline batteries. The removal of mercury from paint residues is the result of bans by the Environmental Protection Agency, and voluntary cancellations of registrations by the paint industry, of mercury-based biocides in 1990 and The tables clearly demonstrate that, currently, batteries discarded from households and other sources of MSW are by far the greatest source of mercury. Light bulbs, paint residues, thermometers, thermostats, and pigments are estimated to contribute most of the remainder of mercury in 1-6

23 Figure 1-1. Discards of mercury in MSW, 1989 Lighting 3.8% Paint Residues 2.6% _ Thermometers 2.3% \ Thermostats 1.6% Pigments 1.4% All Others <1% Total mercury discards = 709 short tons Figure 1-2. Percentage discards of mercury in MSW, 1970 to 2000 All Others Pigments Paint Residues Lighting Batteries 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1-7

24 MSW. A few other uses, such as dental mercury and light switches, were also identified, but these totaled less than one percent of mercury in MSW in Each identified source of mercury in MSW is discussed briefly in this section. An overview of mercury discards in MSW in 1989 is shown in Figure 1-1, while Figure 1-2 shows percentage discards of mercury in MSW in 1970 and A more complete discussion of each source, with tables and figures, can be found in Chapter 2. Household Batteries Batteries containing mercury that are assumed to be discarded into MSW are mostly of two types: Alkaline batteries, which are usually the cylinder-shaped batteries used in flashlights, radios and other electronics, and toys. Mercury-zinc batteries, which are usually in a button form, are used in hearing aids, watches, calculators, cameras, and similar applications. Mercury-zinc cylinder-type batteries are also used in some medical applications that were assumed to be discarded in MSW. A few other kinds of batteries-carbon zinc, silver oxide, and zinc air account for relatively small amounts of mercury in MSW. Alkaline Batteries. Alkaline batteries accounted for about 419 short tons, or over 59 percent, of discards of mercury in MSW in Figure 1-3 short tons 700 Figure 1-3. Discards of mercury In batteries in MSW, 1970 to All Others Mercury-Zinc Alkaline 1-8

25 illustrates that alkaline batteries had a very small market share in 1970, but they increased rapidly up to the present time. Mercury has been used in alkaline batteries to deter corrosion and inhibit hydrogen buildup that can cause cell rupture. While the amount of mercury used in each battery has been quite small, the large numbers of alkaline batteries sold have caused these batteries to become the leading source of mercury in MSW. The battery industry has been under intense pressure to reduce the amounts of mercury (and other heavy metals) discarded into MSW. This has occurred both in Europe and, more recently, in the United States. The industry has announced its intention to reduce mercury in alkaline batteries to percent by weight by 1992, and to eventually eliminate all mercury from these batteries. Projections made for this report take these goals into account. Mercury-Zinc Batteries. Mercuric oxide is used as the cathode material in mercury-zinc batteries, so mercury comprises a relatively high percentage of the material in these batteries. They contributed over 196 tons, or almost 28 percent, of mercury discards in As Figure 1-3 shows, the amount of mercury discarded in mercury-zinc batteries has declined over the years as other kinds of batteries (silver oxide, zinc air) have taken some of their market share. While mercury can be eliminated from alkaline batteries, it is an integral part of mercury-zinc batteries. Discards of mercury from this source were thus projected to decrease but not be eliminated. Other Batteries. Other batteries that contributed about 5 tons, or less than one percent, of mercury discards in MSW in 1989 include carbon-zinc batteries, silver oxide batteries, and zinc air batteries. Production of carbonzinc batteries is declining, while use of silver oxide and zinc air batteries has been increasing. It is projected that use of mercury in these batteries will be discontinued. Recovery for Recycling. While some programs to recover batteries, either for recycling or simply to keep them out of the waste stream, were identified, the quantities recovered were not believed to be significant enough to affect discards in It was assumed for this report that 5 percent of the mercury in batteries will be recovered in 1995 and that 20 percent will be recovered in the year These recovery rates are consistent with rates achieved by many other products in MSW, and lower than some. Since it is projected that only mercury-zinc batteries will contain mercury in those years, they would account for all of this recovery. 1-9

26 Electric Lighting The second largest source of mercury in MSW in 1989 was estimated to be electric lighting. This mercury came from two sources: The ordinary fluorescent lamps (bulbs) used in residences, offices, and other commercial and institutional buildings Certain high intensity lamps (bulbs) used in lighting streets, parking lots, and similar uses. Of these two sources, fluorescent lamps are by far the largest, accounting for 26 tons of mercury in MSW in 1989, or 3.7 percent of total discards. All lighting sources were estimated to contribute nearly 27 tons of mercury in 1989, or nearly 4 percent of total discards. The mercury content of these lamps has been reduced over the past 5 years, but increasing sales will cause the amount of mercury from this source to continue to increase. New energy-efficient fluorescent lamps are being promoted as a replacement for incandescent lamps at this time, but it is too early to determine whether sales and discards of these lamps will increase the amount of mercury discarded. While a few attempts to recover mercury from fluorescent lamps were identified, no basis for projecting a significant amount of recovery from lamps in MSW in the future was found. Paint Residues For many years, mercury-based biocides were used in paints to control microbial growth in the paint cans and to preserve paint film from attack by mildew after it was applied to a surface. This use of mercury was partially banned by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1990 through voluntary cancellation of registrations, and the bans were made complete through voluntary cancellation of the remaining registrations in Even though mercury is no longer used as a biocide in the manufacture of paints, paint cans containing residues including mercury will continue to be discarded. Since data to document these discards are not available, an estimation methodology was devised to estimate discards of paint residues in cans. It was estimated that about 18 tons of mercury were discarded in paint residues in 1989, or 2.6 percent of total discards. These discards are projected to decline rapidly as paints made after the ban on mercury took effect begin to be discarded. (Note that these estimates do not include mercury in paints applied to interior or exterior surfaces, which are not classified as municipal solid waste.) 1-10

27 Fever Thermometers Mercury is used in a wide variety of instruments, most of which are used in industrial applications. The familiar fever thermometer was, however, identified as a source of mercury discarded from homes and medical establishments. In 1989, an estimated 16.3 tons of mercury were discarded in thermometers, or 2.3 percent of total discards. Mercury fever thermometers are being replaced by digital thermometers, especially in medical applications. It therefore was projected that there will be a gradual decline in discards of mercury from this source. Thermostats The typical thermostat used for temperature control in residences and other buildings contains mercury that could enter MSW if the thermostat is discarded. (This mercury could also become demolition waste if the thermostat is in a demolished house.) An estimated 11 tons of mercury entered MSW in thermostats in 1989; this was less than 2 percent of total discards. Thermostats have a long life-stimated to be 20 years so there is a long lag time before they are discarded. (Note that the apparent dip in discards of mercury in thermostats in 1995 is due to low housing starts in the recession year of 1975.) Thus, even though mercury thermostats are gradually being replaced by digital thermostats, they are projected to continue to be a source of mercury in MSW through Pigments Mercury has a long history of use in pigments, but it is difficult to quantify the uses for pigments containing mercury. (The Bureau of Mines withholds data on mercury in pigments, and no other published sources were found. Estimates were made using a number of assumptions.) It appears that most of the mercury in pigments is used in plastics, often in combination with cadmium, but other uses could be paints, printing inks, rubber, textiles, and others. Based on the data available, it was estimated that 10 tons of mercury in pigments were discarded in This was less than 2 percent of total discards. Use of mercury in pigments has been declining steadily. Cadmiummercury pigments are no longer manufactured in the United States, but some imports were identified. Since there is continuing pressure on pigment makers to eliminate metals, it was projected that use of mercury in pigments will continue to decline rapidly. 1-11

28 Dental Uses Mercury is used in dental amalgams for fillings in teeth. Most excess mercury in dentists offices is collected for re-refining, but some is discarded, and a small amount of mercury is assumed to enter MSW in lost teeth and fillings. It was estimated that 4 tons of mercury (less than one percent of total discards) entered MSW from these sources in Usage of dental mercury has been declining, and this is projected to be a declining source of mercury in MSW. Special Paper Coating A small amount of mercury is used in the coating for a special paper used for scanning off a cathode ray tube. This might be used in hospitals and microfiche printers, for example. It was estimated that about one ton of mercury entered MSW from this source in The companies making this special paper have announced plans to phase out the use of mercury, and it was projected that this would be done by Mercury Electric Light Switches Silent mercury switches for lighting are used in many homes and commercial buildings. The switches, which have been manufactured since the 1960s, have a very long life, up to 50 years. This use of mercury was difficult to quantify (the Bureau of Mines does not report this use separately), but it was estimated that less than one ton of mercury was discarded in switches in These discards are projected to increase to about 2 tons by 1995, however, as more switches reach their life expectancy and are discarded. Film Pack Batteries Instant cameras use a film pack powered by a contained mercury until 1988, when use of mercury discontinued. Trends in Discards of Mercury in MSW battery. These batteries was reportedly Trends in discards of mercury in municipal solid waste are illustrated in Figure 1-4. Mercury in batteries has dominated the discards for the entire period analyzed. Discards of mercury in batteries apparently peaked in 1986, and this source is projected to decline as mercury is eliminated from alkaline batteries and usage of mercury-zinc batteries declines. Discards of mercury in electric lighting (primarily fluorescent bulbs), and mercury switches are projected to continue to increase. Discards in paint 1-12

29 short tons Figure 1-4. Discards of mercury in MSW, 1970 to s All Other Thermometers Paint Resides Lighting Batteries s residues, pigments, dental uses, paper coating, and film pack batteries are projected to decline rapidly or be eliminated: Mercury in thermometers and thermostats will continue to be present in the year 2000 if present trends continue, although mercury thermometers and thermostats are gradually being phased out by digital models. DISCONTINUED SOURCES OF MERCURY IN MSW Research for this report identified several products that can be classified as MSW where mercury has been used in the past. These sources were not quantified, but are listed below for informative purposes. Mirrors were formerly manufactured with mercury in the coating, but this practice was discontinued about 50 years ago. Glass has been made with mercury in highly specialized applications. Felt was formerly treated with mercury, but the 1950s. this was discontinued in Textiles intended for outdoor use have been treated with mercury as a fungicide, but this practice has been discontinued. Paper production formerly used mercury compounds as a fungicide. This use is not allowed under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). 1-13

30 MERCURY IN NON-MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE PRODUCTS While the purpose of this report was to quantify sources of mercury in municipal solid waste, other products containing mercury were identified in the research. Some of these wastes could very likely be managed in a landfill or combustor intended primarily for MSW. The mercury-containing products identified are listed in this section. More discussion of these products is included in Chapter 3. Agricultural Products Mercury and mercury compounds have been used as fungicides for agricultural purposes. These uses were greatly restricted by FIFRA, and presently only applications for treatment of outdoor textiles, to control brown mold on freshly sawn lumber, to control Dutch elm disease, and to control snow mold are allowed. No use is permitted on food crops. Paints In the past mercury compounds were widely used as biocides or preservatives in paint, especially in latex paints. Mercury was also formerly used in antifouling paints for marine use, but this use was banned in By regulatory action taken in 1990 and 1991, EPA prohibited further use of mercury in indoor or outdoor paints manufactured in the U.S. Paint manufactured before the ban may, however, still be discarded (see the section on paint residues). Also, paint applied to indoor and outdoor surfaces can be discarded along with construction and demolition wastes (which are not classified as municipal solid waste by EPA). Catalysts for Plastics Mercury is or has been used in the catalysis of various plastics, including polyurethane, vinyl chloride, and vinyl acetate. Apparently there is negligible residual mercury in any products that would be classified as MSW. Chlorine and Caustic Soda Production Mercury is used in the manufacturing process for the production of chlorine and caustic soda. In fact, this use was the largest consumer of mercury in the United States in This use was classified as industrial, not MSW. 1-14

31 Explosives Mercury has had long usage in explosives. The best information available indicates that for about the past 20 years, only the military has used mercury in explosives. Laboratory Uses Mercury is commonly used in laboratories. Laboratory wastes are regulated and are not classified as MSW. Pharmaceuticals and Cosmetics Mercury is an ingredient in a variety of pharmaceutical products and is allowed in very small quantities in eye-area cosmetics. While residues of these mercury-containing products no doubt enter MSW, they would be classified as household hazardous wastes and were not quantified. Electrical Apparatus Mercury is used in a variety of ways in electrical apparatus. These uses include tilt switches, relays, and similar industrial or communications applications. Except for light switches used in residences and commercial and institutional buildings, these were not classified as municipal solid wastes. Discontinued Uses There are a number of non-msw applications for mercury that have been discontinued. Those identified are listed below. Embalming fluid Photographic development Soap Treatment of Dutch elm disease (allowed but discontinued) Wood preservatives. LIMITATIONS OF THIS REPORT The purpose of this report was to characterize the sources of mercury in municipal solid waste. The characterization applies to the United States as a whole, and should not be construed to be representative of mercury in MSW in a particular locality. Local variations in waste composition and in waste management practices may cause the mercury content at any particular facility to vary from the average. Also, the MSW received at any given waste management facility varies from day to day and even from hour to hour. A load of waste that includes cans of paint containing mercury or several 1-15

32 discarded mercury-containing batteries could have a mercury content far above the average. In many cases, the amounts of historical, current, and projected mercury in products in MSW are not well documented in any available data source. The estimates in this report are, therefore, often based on assumptions, which are documented in Chapter 2. Identification of alternatives and substitutes for mercury in products was not part of the work scope for this report. Information on these topics must come from other sources. 1-16

33 Chapter 1 REFERENCES Clement Associates. Toxicological Profile for Mercury. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, U.S. Public Heath Service, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. December Hutton, M. Human Health Concerns of Lead, Mercury, Cadmium and Arsenic. In Lead, Mercury, Cadmium and Arsenic in the Environment, edited by T. C. Hutchinson and K.M. Meema. John Wiley & Sons Nriagu, J.O., and Pacyna, J.M. Quantitative Assessment of Worldwide Contamination of Air, Water and Soils by Trace Metals. Nature. Vol. 333, May Lindberg, S., Stokes, P. M., Goldberg, E., and Wren, C. Group Report Mercury. In Lead, Mercury, Cadmium and Arsenic in the Environment, edited by T. C. Hutchinson and K.M. Meema. John Wiley & Sons Lindberg, S.E. Emission and Deposition of Atmospheric Mercury Vapor. In Lead, Mercury, Cadmium and Arsenic in the Environment, edited by T. C. Hutchinson and K.M. Meema. John Wiley & sons Pacyna, J.M. Atmospheric Emissions of Arsenic, Cadmium, Lead and Mercury from High Temperature Processes in Power Generation and Industry. In Lead, Mercury, Cadmium and Arsenic in the Environment, edited by T. C. Hutchinson and K.M. Meema. John Wiley & Sons Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 1990 Update. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste and Emergency Response (0S-305). EPA/530-SW June Characterization of Products Containing Lead and Cadmium in Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1970 to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/530-SW-89 /O15A. January Characterization of Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, 1960 to 2000 (Update 1988). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. NTIS No. PB CBT. March Subtitle D Study Phase I Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. El?A/530-SW October

34 Chapter 2 MERCURY IN MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE BACKGROUND INFORMATION* Mercury is a silvery-white metal that exists as a liquid at room temperature. Also known as quicksilver, mercury was first described by the Greek philosopher Aristotle in the fourth century B. C., when it was used in a religious ceremony. Mercury was used in small quantities primarily for medicinal and cosmetic purposes until the 16th century, when demand increased with development of the Patio process for the recovery of silver by amalgamation. Invention of the barometer in 1643 and the mercury thermometer in 1720 also increased the use of mercury. After World War I, other uses for mercury were developed. Mercury was used in production of drugs, electrical apparatus, the dry cell battery, and the mercury cell process to produce chlorine and caustic soda. Mercury occurs in nature predominantly in combination with sulfur, the most important ore being HgS or cinnabar. - This ore is processed to produce 99.9 percent pure prime virgin mercury for industrial use or can be processed to higher purity for other applications. Mercury can also be obtained from secondary sources by recycling industrial losses or end products. Mercury is a useful product in many applications. It is rated as one of the best electrical conductors among metals. It has the ability to form alloys (amalgams) with almost all metals except iron. Its inability to wet and cling glass makes it useful for measuring devices. In spite of its useful properties, mercury can create serious human health and environmental problems. Ingestion of mercury can affect the central nervous system, including sensory, visual, and auditory functions and coordination (3). Inhalation of mercury can affect the nervous system and the kidneys (4). to MERCURY AND ITS COMPOUNDS Some of the more commonly used mercury compounds are listed in this section. The chemical formula, a general description, and uses are given. * References 1,2, and 11 were the primary sources for this section. ** References 5 and 6 were used for this section. 2-1

35 Mercury Metal - Hg Mercury metal in its liquid state is used in applications such as switches and thermometers. Mercurous Chloride - HgCl Also referred to as mercury (I) chloride and calomel, mercurous chloride has been used as a fungicide in cosmetics, in agriculture to control root insects, and on turf to control mold. It also has pharmaceutical value as a diuretic and an antiseptic and is widely used in laboratories. Mercuric Chloride - HgC1 2 Mercuric chloride is also known as mercury (II) chloride and corrosive sublimate or is sometimes ammoniated. It was once used as an intensifier for black and white photography and was first described for use as a fungicide in agriculture in It is now primarily used in pharmaceuticals and on turf to control mold. Mercuric Oxide - HgO Mercuric oxide appears as a red or yellow powder. Red mercuric oxide was utilized more than yellow as a pigment for anti-fouling paints. It has a major use as a cathode material for mercury batteries and was also listed as an anti-bacterial chemical for some cosmetics. Mercuric Sulfide - HgS Also referred to as vermilion, mercuric sulfide is the most frequently occurring natural form of mercury and is mined as cinnabar. Mercuric sulfide red is used as a pigment for plastics, linen, and paper and as an antibacterial in pharmaceuticals. Phenylmercuric Acetate - C 6 H 5 HgCH 3 C00 Usually abbreviated as PMA, phenylmercuric acetate has been used as a bactericide. It was first marketed as a seed treatment for agriculture in 1932, but the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) restricted agricultural uses to control of turf diseases such as snow mold. PMA s registration for use in paints was cancelled by EPA in

36 Mercury Fulminate Mercury fulminate was used in many explosives due to its high sensitivity. It served as an initiating detonator for larger chain reaction explosions. Thimerosal - C 9 H 9 HgNa0 2 S Thimerosal is primarily used as a preservative. It was once applied as a treatment for agricultural seeds, but is now primarily used in cosmetics and pharmaceuticals. MERCURY CONSUMPTION IN PRODUCTS SOLD IN THE UNITED STATES A summary of mercury consumption in the United States as reported by the Bureau of Mines for the time period 1967 through 1989 is included as Appendix B, and an overview is presented in Table 2-1 and Figure 2-1. These figures represent consumption of mercury, which should not be interpreted as discards in municipal solid waste. Some of the mercury is used for other products (non-msw), some is used in products that are exported, and other mercury comes into the United States in products that are imported. All of these adjustments are made in the process of estimating MSW discards. Overall, consumption of mercury has been generally declining over the past decade. Use of mercury in batteries some of which are used in industrial, communications, military, and transportation applications rather Table 2-1 CONSUMPTION OF MERCURY IN THE UNITED STATES, 1980 AND 1989 (In short tons) Product Chlorine & caustic soda manufacture Batteries Mildew proofing of paints , Trend 420 Increasing 276 Decreasing 212 Decreasing Types of Waste Generated Industrial process MSW, industrial, other I Wiring devices & switches Measuring & control instruments Dental equipment & supplies Electrical lighting Laboratory uses Other uses Total CONSTRUCTION & demolition, MSW (residues in cans) MSW, industrial, other MSW, industrial, other MSW, other Primari ,241 Source: U.S. Bureau of Mines (Appendix B). 43 Decreasing 34 Little change 20 Increasing 82 Decreasing 1,338 Decreasing HAZARDOUS MSW,INDUSTRIAL 2-3

37 Figure 2-1. Consumption of mercury In the U. S., 1980 and 1989 short tons 2,500 T 2,000 1,500 1, r Chlorine, caustic soda mfg Batteries Paint mildew-proofing Wiring devices & switches Instruments o Source: Bureau of Mines All Other uses than products classified as MSW declined dramatically between 1980 and Use of mercury in chlorine and caustic soda manufacture (an industrial process, not MSW) increased in the decade of the 1980s. Use of mercury for mildew-proofing paints (no longer permitted) declined even before the new regulations were in place. Use of mercury in wiring devices and switches increased somewhat, while use in measuring and control instruments decreased. Some of these applications are discarded in MSW (e.g. some thermometers and switches), but many of these applications are found in industrial, communications, and military uses that are not classified as MSW. Other uses of mercury (each consuming less that 100 short tons per year in 1989) include dental uses, electrical lighting, laboratory uses, and pigments. Dental uses have been decreasing; a small part apparently enters MSW, while much of the remainder is presumed to be buried or cremated with deceased persons. Mercury use in electrical lighting (mostly MSW) has been fairly stable. Use of mercury in pigments (mostly MSW), although not well documented, appears to be declining. Use of mercury in laboratories is regulated and is presumed not to enter MSW. BATTERIES Batteries used in households and some other applications are an important source of mercury in municipal solid waste; over two billion household batteries are sold in the United States each year (7). The average consumer uses seven to eight batteries per year (8). (All of these batteries do not contain mercury, of course.) 2-4

38 Batteries are electrochemical devices that convert chemical energy to electrical energy. A cell consists of a positive electrode, called the cathode, a negative electrode, called the anode, and a liquid solution through which an electrical current can travel, referred to as the electrolyte (9). Primary batteries are batteries that are nonrechargeable. Secondary batteries can be recharged and reused. Batteries vary in size, shape, and voltage requirements. The choice of which battery to use depends on the type of product requiring the battery. For household batteries, two general categories of applications exist. One is the miniature batteries used in hearing aids, electronic watches, and cameras. These batteries are usually button sized. The second category includes batteries used in portable (not corded or plug-in) items, such as test equipment, radio apparatus, lighting, calculators, and other electrical equipment (10). Types of Batteries A description of small household type batteries is shown in Table 2-2. The majority of household batteries in municipal solid waste would be in one of these categories. Mercury is used as cathode material in the form of red mercuric oxide in the mercury-cadmium, mercury iridium bismuth, and mercury-zinc batteries. In all others, it is amalgamated with the zinc anode to deter corrosion and inhibit hydrogen buildup that can cause cell rupture and fire (11). For each type of battery containing mercury and classified as municipal solid waste, a table showing best estimates of the weight of mercury in the battery was prepared (Appendix C). Some batteries that contribute only a small percentage to total household battery sales were not included.* To simplify calculations, all of the sizes of button batteries were averaged to obtain one representative number for each type. The battery industry has announced that reduction in mercury content of batteries has been made and will continue to be made in the future. In fact, a commitment has been made by the battery industry to lower the mercury content to weight percent by These reductions are reflected in projections of future mercury discards. Additional information on each type of battery is included below. Alkaline batteries and mercury-zinc batteries, which were determined to contribute by far the majority of mercury discarded into MSW, are discussed first. * The sizes not included are 6 volt, batteries larger than 9 volt, AAA batteries in all types except alkaline, and specific sizes of button batteries. 2-5

39 Table 2-2 TYPES OF HOUSEHOLD BATTERIES Type Sizes Cathode Anode Electrolyte BATTERIES CONTAINING MERCURY Alkaline I 9 volt, D, C, Manganese Zinc Potassium AA, AAA, button Dioxide Hydroxide Carbon-Zinc 9 volt, D, C, Manganese Zinc Ammonium AA, AAA Dioxide and /or Chloride Heavy duty 9 volt, D, C, Manganese Zinc Zinc Chloride AA, AAA Dioxide Mercury-Zinc D, C, AA, AAA, Mercuric Oxide Zinc Potassium Hydroxide button, some cylindrical Silver Oxide Button Silver oxide Zinc Zinc Air Button gen Zinc BATTERIES CONTAINING MERCURY; NOT CLASSIFIED AS MS Mercury- Button, some Mercuric Oxide Cadmium Cadmium* cylindrical Mercury Iridium Button, some Mercuric Oxide Iridium Bismuth* cylindrical Bismuth BATTERIES NOT CONTAINING MERCURY Nickel-Cadmium 9 volt, D, C, Nickel Oxide Cadmium AA, AAA Lithium 9 volt, C, AA, Various metal Lithium coin and button oxides or Sodium Hydroxide Potassium Hydroxide or Sodium Hydroxide Potassium Hydroxide Alkaline Solution Alkaline Solution Potassium Hydroxide or Sodium Hydroxide Organic solvent or salt solution * NH/VT Solid Waste Project Source: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency except where noted. Classifications into MSW and Non-MSW by Franklin Associates, Ltd. Alkaline Batteries. The alkaline battery is the most common household battery. It has taken over the carbon-zinc market even though the retail price is greater than five times as much, and the demand is expected to grow (12, 13). In a 1986 market study, it was projected that alkaline batteries will account for 75 percent of all future purchases (14). In 1985, 1.2 billion alkaline batteries were sold in the United States and an estimated 1.93 billion will be sold in 1990 (13). The alkaline battery is recommended for high-rate discharge systems and low temperatures (12). These batteries are used in flashlights, radios and other electronics, toys, and portable appliances. Button sized alkaline batteries are used in watches and digital thermometers. 2-6

40 The percent and weight of mercury in the various sizes of alkaline batteries for various years as shown in Appendix C were determined by averaging data from three companies. In addition, testing to determine mercury content in a sample of alkaline batteries was carried out as part of this project. The results of this testing are incorporated in the tables in Appendix C. (Batteries purchased in 1990 were assumed to have been manufactured in 1989). A complete report on the battery testing is included as Appendix F to this report. Mercury-Zinc Batteries. The mercury-zinc battery contains a large percentage of mercury in comparison to all the other commonly used household batteries. This battery is used in many different situations. Household uses include transistorized equipment, hearing aids, electronic watches, pocket calculators, cameras, radios, smoke detectors, garage door openers, and tape recorders (12, 15, 16). The mercury-zinc cell is also employed in industrial applications such as regulated power supplies, radiation detection meters, portable potentiometers, electronic computers, voltage recorders, scientific and military equipment, depth finders, sonobuoys, emergency beacons, rescue transceivers, and surveillance sets (12, 15). Usage in cardiac pacemakers was common until a longer-lived solid electrolyte cell was developed (15). Mercury-zinc cylinder cells are also produced. These batteries have applications in medical and military equipment. Uses include pagers, oxygen and fetal monitors, portable EKG monitors for medical uses, and night vision goggles for the military (17). The characteristics of the mercury-zinc battery make it popular. It has a long life, high capacity-to-volume ratio, steady discharge rate, higher sustained voltage under load, no recuperation required, and high resistance to shock, vibration, vacuum, pressure, corrosive atmospheres, and high humidity (12). Problems include the retail price, which is 26 times as high as carbon-zinc batteries, and performance that is sub-par at low temperatures (12). The demand for the mercury-zinc battery in the consumer market has been decreasing (8). Currently, it has managed to hold 30 percent of the button battery market, with most of those sales for use in hearing aids (13). Other Batteries that Contain Mercury Carbon-Zinc Batteries. A general purpose and a heavy duty carbon-zinc battery are made. The general purpose version, hereafter referred to as carbon-zinc, is also known as the Leclanche battery. It is less expensive than an alkaline or mercury-zinc cell due to a high volume automated manufacturing process (12). The heavy duty carbon-zinc battery, referred to in 2-7

41 this study as heavy duty, is very similar to the Leclanche cell. It is capable of higher discharge rates and is generally more expensive (7). The availability and sizes are an attractive feature of the carbon-zinc batteries. Examples of portable uses include roadside hazard lamps, intruder alarm systems, fluorescent handlamps, direct reading frequency meters, wide range oscillators, communication transceivers, tape recorders, and miniature ignition devices (12). Use of the carbon-zinc battery is, however, declining. Silver Oxide Batteries. The silver oxide battery is produced in button form and is used for miniature applications (13). It Can easily be substituted for the mercury-zinc battery. Its demand is increasing as silver oxide finds a niche in the market for watch batteries. Use in hearing aids is also becoming more common (13). Zinc Air Batteries. The zinc air battery also can serve as a replacement for mercury-zinc button sized batteries. It has a service life twice as long (18), and although it is more expensive than the mercury-zinc battery, the consumer market demand is increasing (8). Problems have occurred with the zinc air battery. It is unpredictable in too dry or too moist air (18). Also, it has been difficult to produce airbreathing cathodes of consistent quality (12). Mercury Iridium Bismuth Batteries. This mercury battery is essentially used for specialized situations only, and was assumed not to be discarded into MSW. It is recommended for applications requiring high reliability, including reactor and high temperature processing, telemetry systems, military uses, and memory core standby supplies (12). Mercury-Cadmium Batteries. The mercury-cadmium battery is similar to the mercury-zinc cell (11). It has a similar structure (12) and can be used in compatible situations. The cost is higher and the voltage is lower than in an equivalent sized mercury-zinc battery (15). The mercury-cadmium battery is generally recommended for special applications only (12). Some of its uses include gas and oil well logging, telemetry from engines and other heat sources, alarm systems, and operation of remote apparatus such as data-monitoring devices, buoys, weather stations, and emergency equipment (15). It can also be used in the same situations as the mercury iridium bismuth battery (12). It was assumed that mercurycadmium batteries are not discarded in MSW. 2-8

42 Imports of Household Batteries Batteries in Products (Domestic and Imported) Retail Sales of Total Retail Sales Discards of Domestic of Batteries Household Batteries Household Batteries In MSW I Figure 2-2. Flow diagram for discards of batteries containing mercury in MSW. Discards of Mercury in Batteries in MSW To determine the total discards of mercury in batteries in MSW, retail sales of domestic household batteries were first obtained. (See Appendix C for the detailed data.) These basic figures were adjusted for imports of household batteries and for batteries included in domestic and imported products such as watches to obtain total discards of batteries containing mercury. A flow diagram for the components of the discards of batteries containing mercury into MSW is shown above (Figure 2-2). Retail Sales of Batteries. Discards of mercury in batteries in MSW were calculated using numbers for retail sales in the United States supplied by the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) (Appendix C). Sales figures are provided for the years 1983 to 1988 with estimates for 1989 to These figures established a trend and enabled estimates to be made for the sales of each type of battery from 1967 to 1982 and from 1993 to From total retail sales, the amount of mercury discarded from batteries was calculated by adjusting for additional batteries entering the municipal solid waste stream from sources other than households and determining the mercury content in each battery type and size. Data on imports of household batteries were not available for every year. The Department of Commerce only reports the values of shipments in their publications. Based on conversations with NEMA and data obtained for 1989 shipments from Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan, a 15 percent addition to U.S. retail sales was considered to be a reasonable estimate for imports (19, 20). This percentage was applied to every year analyzed in this study. 2-9

43 In addition to batteries sold at retail stores, there are other sources of mercury in batteries in the municipal solid waste stream. Adjustments were made for batteries already in watches and digital thermometers when purchased. Only button sized batteries would be used in these sources. Sales figures for both products were obtained for the years 1984 to 1988 (21, 22). Digital thermometers, comprising 33 percent of the sales of all thermometers, including imports, contributed only a small amount of the batteries from this source, mainly in the form of alkaline or silver (22). Watches, on the other hand, contributed a significant number of batteries to the municipal solid waste stream. Imported watches account for approximately 95 percent of all watches sold in the United States (23). (A number of these watches contain batteries made in the U.S. that were exported to foreign countries.) The types of batteries used now are primarily either alkaline or silver. Mercury-zinc batteries were used predominantly in the 1970s (24). Weight of Mercury in Batteries. Total weight of mercury in batteries in MSW was obtained by combining the data on weight of mercury in each type of battery with the adjusted retail sales for each type of battery (Appendix C). An upward adjustment of 15 percent was made to the weight of mercury-zinc batteries to account for battery sales to hospitals. An average time lag of one year exists between the manufacture of the battery and the date of purchase in the retail market. Therefore, the weight of mercury in the battery used to calculate the total mercury was obtained from the previous year. This has an effect especially in years where a reduction in mercury content occurs. Mercury Discarded in MSW. Tables 2-3 and 2-4 display the amount of mercury entering the municipal solid waste stream by battery type in short tons and percentage. It was assumed that 100 percent of all household batteries sold would be discarded two years following purchase. This is not quite true, but a large majority of batteries are believed to be discarded in the first two years after purchase (17). Alkaline batteries contributed the largest quantity of mercury to the municipal solid waste stream, even though they contain the smallest percentage of mercury in any mercury-containing battery discarded in MSW. Projections The trends in battery sales are expected to continue to the year 2000 along their present course (Appendix C). The percentages used for imports and non-retail discards were not altered; they are assumed to follow along 2-10

44 Table 2-3 DISCARDS OF MERCURY IN HOUSEHOLD BATTERIES (In short tons) Heavy Year Alka- Carbon- Duty Mercury- Silver Purchased line zinc Carbon-Zinc zinc Oxide Total Net Year Zinc Mercury Recovery Mercury Dis- Air Discards (1) Discards carded (2) (1) Recovery is projected to be 5% of discards in 1995, 20% in (2) It is assumed 100% of all household batteries sold are discarded two years following purchase. Source: Appendix C. with retail demand and sales. It appears that alkaline and nickel-cadmium batteries will become the dominant portable source of energy in the future. Even though battery sales will continue to increase, discards of mercury in batteries are projected to decline because of the commitment by makers of alkaline batteries to reduce mercury content. In addition, sales of mercuryzinc batteries the other leading contributor of mercury in batteries have been declining. The declining trends in discards of mercury in batteries are shown in Figure

45 Year Purchased Table 2-4 DISCARDS OF MERCURY IN HOUSEHOLD BATTERIES (In percent of total before recovery) Alkaline 1.0% 1.3% 1.7% 3.0% 4.6% 7.4% 11.6% 16.6% 21.1% 26.0% 31.2% 36.8% 43.0% 48.0% 52.4% 56.2% 59.5% 63.4% 66.1% 64.0% 67.5% 70.2% 68.7% 23.6% 0.0% carbon- Zinc 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.2% 1.1% 1.1% 1.0% 1.0% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.0% Heavy Duty Carbon-Zinc 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1 % 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.0% Mercury- Zinc 97.5% 97.1% 96.8% 95.5% 93.9% 91.2% 87.0% 82.0% 77.6% 72.8% 67.6% 62.1% 56.0% 51.1% 46.7% 43.0% 39.7% 35.9% 33.2% 35.1 % 31.6% 28.9% 30.2% 74.5% 100.0% Silver Oxide 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% 0.4% 0.0% zinc Year Air Discarded (1) 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.5% 1.1% 0.0% (1) It is assumed 100% of all household batteries sold are discarded two years following purchase. Source: Table 2-3. Recovery of Batteries A number of communities in the United States have set up programs to recover household batteries, including those containing mercury. The usual purpose of these programs is to prevent disposal of the batteries, along with the heavy metals they contain, in landfills or incinerators. Curbside collection, collection boxes in retail stores, and collection through household hazardous waste programs have all been used to recover batteries (25, 26). In addition to household battery collection programs, medical and industrial batteries have also been collected, and in fact these have been identified as easier targets for recovery (26, 27). 2-12

46 Short tons Figure 2-3. Discards of mercury in batteries In MSW, 1970 to I Once mercury-containing batteries are collected, opportunities for recycling the mercury are limited. Only one U.S. firm (Mercury Refining Company) has been identified as having the facilities to recycle heavy metals from household batteries. A limited amount of exporting of recovered batteries also occurs (26). Based on this information, no significant recovery of mercury in batteries was estimated for 1989 (Table 2-3). There is strong interest in recovery and recycling of many materials in the United States, and recovery of household batteries has an additional appeal because of the need to remove heavy metals from the waste stream. Some states, such as Minnesota, New Jersey, and Connecticut, have passed or are considering legislation aimed at recovery of household batteries (26, 28). Because of this interest and the pilot programs now in place, recovery of 5 percent of mercury in batteries in 1995 and 20 percent recovery in 2000 was projected (Table 2-3). (It should be noted that this is an estimate of recovery and removal from MSW discards, not necessarily of recycling. This is consistent with the methodology used in other EPA municipal solid waste characterization reports.) These recovery estimates, while not based on a history of recovery, are not inconsistent with recovery rates for other products in MSW. The lead in automotive batteries is recovered at an estimated rate of about 90 percent. Other products have achieved rapid increases in recovery rates when interest was sufficient. For example, recovery of aluminum beverage cans increased from about 5 percent in 1970 to about 55 percent in 1988, while recovery of PET beverage bottles increased from essentially zero in 1975 to over 20 percent in

47 Assumptions and Data for Estimating Mercury Discards in Batteries Data on battery sales were obtained from a trade organization. Data on weights of mercury in batteries were obtained from industrial sources and from test data (for alkaline batteries purchased in 1990). An adjustment for imports was made based on information from industrial sources. It was assumed that batteries are purchased approximately one year after they are manufactured, and are discarded two years after purchase. It was assumed that there was no significant recovery of mercury in batteries from MSW prior to Recovery rates of 5 percent in 1995 and 20 percent in 2000 were projected. ELECTRIC LIGHTING Mercury is used in several types of electric lamps (light bulbs) with a multitude of applications. Mercury-containing lamps include fluorescent lamps and high intensity discharge (HID) lamps such as mercury vapor, metal halide, and high pressure sodium lamps. Applications include street lighting, industrial and office lighting, floodlighting, photography, underwater lighting, insect lamps, and sunlamps (29). Discards of mercury in electric lamps were estimated using U.S. Department of Commerce data on consumption of electric lamps that contain mercury (30), plus industry information on the average amount of mercury in each lamp. Within each category of lamp (fluorescent and HID), mercury content varies with bulb size and wattage. Lamp redesign and improvements in manufacturing process control have reduced mercury content approximately 25 percent over the last 5 years (31). Estimated average mercury content figures used were: Fluorescent lamps mg present 55 mg HID lamps mg present 25 mg 2-14

48 Assumptions and Data for Estimating Mercury Discards in Electric Lighting 1. Apparent consumption of electric lamps as reported by the U.S. Department of Commerce includes adjustments for imports and exports. 2. Although there seems to be some recovery of mercury from fluorescent lamps, no recovery significant enough to affect estimates of discards was identified. It was assumed that no significant recovery will be developed over the next 10 years. 3. It was assumed that fluorescent lamps are discarded four years after they are produced based on an average lamp life of 20,000 hours (32). HID lamps are assumed to be discarded the same year they are produced. 4. Projections were based on past trends. New long-life fluorescent bulbs as a replacement for incandescent bulbs are being promoted, but it is too early to determine if these sales will significantly increase discards of mercury. Estimated historical discards of mercury in electric lamps are summarized in Figure 2-4 and Table 2-5. Figure 2-4. Discards of mercury in electric lighting in MSW, 1970 to 2000 Short tons l I

49 Table 2-5 DISCARDS OF MERCURY IN ELECTRIC LAMPS (In short tons) Fluorescent Lamps High Intensity Discharge Lamps Total Apparent Average M Apparent Average Mercury Mercury Consumption (1) Mercury Discarded (2) Consumption (1) Mercury Discarded Discarded (3) Year (thousand units) (short tons) (thousand units) Content (g) (short tons) (short tons) e 2000 e 229,000 e 226,000 e 245,000 e 261,000 e 260,000 e 260,000 e 283,000e 294,000 e 265,000 e 256,000 e 280, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,841 e 7,684 e 8,420 e 9,349 e 9,158 e 8,737 e 10,383 10,853 12,175 13,532 30,187 21,397 20,891 22,146 25,636 25,529 22,206 28,143 24,479 28,090 (1) Apparent consumption = Domestic shipments - Exports+ Imports (2) Fluorescent lamps discarded 4 years after production. (3) Total discards = fluorescent discards+ HID discards e - Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate Details may not add to totals due to rounding. Source U.S. Department of Commerce, Current Industrial Reports PAINT RESIDUES For many years, mercury-based biocides have been added to paints and other coatings for two purposes: To preserve the paint in the can by controlling microbial growth To preserve the paint film from mildew attack after it is applied to a surface (30). 2-16

50 Four mercury compounds phenylmercuric acetate (PMA), 3- (chloromethoxy) propylmercuric acetate (CMPA), di (phenylmercury) dodecenylsuccinate (PMDS), and phenylmercuric oleate (PMO) have been registered as biocides in interior paint and exterior paint (33). As of July 1990, all registrations for mercury biocides used in paints and coatings, except those for PMA, were voluntarily cancelled by the registrants (33). In May 1991, EPA announced the voluntary cancellation of the remaining PMA registrations, which were for exterior paints and coatings (34). This should mean a rapid decline in mercury discards in paint residues. An EPA Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances Fact Sheet (33) describes the use of mercury-based biocides in water-based architectural coatings applied to stationary structures (interior and exterior), mobile homes, pavements, and curbs. None of these uses would be classified as municipal solid waste by the usual definitions. Paint applied to homes that are demolished would be classified as construction and demolition wastes, mobile homes would not be classified as MSW, and paint applied to pavements and curbs might enter the air, soil, or water as dust or chips, but not as MSW. Containers (paint cans) used for paint do, however, enter the municipal solid waste stream along with any paint residues remaining. (Some containers undoubtedly go to construction and demolition landfills, but the amount is unknown.) Mercury discarded in these paint residues was therefore considered for this report, although residues of products left in containers have not been considered in previous EPA MSW characterization studies. Since insufficient sampling studies to determine amounts of mercury in discarded paint residues were found, estimates were made based on a series of assumptions shown in Table 2-6 and Figure 2-5. Data from the Bureau of Mines on consumption of mercury in paints and mildew-proofing were used as the basis for the estimates. It was also assumed that no more mercury will be used in paints after 1991 due to the above-mentioned voluntary -. cancellations. However, the length of time it will take manufacturers to deplete existing stocks of mercury compounds is not known. These estimates were undertaken only to indicate the relative importance of these paint discards to the estimates of products containing mercury in MSW. Data on paint discards have not been well-established. As Table 2-6 illustrates, mercury consumption in paint peaked in 1979 and, therefore, mercury discards in paint residues peaked in 1984 under the assumptions used. Even though most mercury use in paints was not banned 2-17

51 Year Mercury Consumption in Paints (1) Table 2-6 ESTIMATED MERCURY IN DISCARDED PAINT RESIDUES (In short tons) Mercury Consumption Adjusted for Mfg Losses (2) Percent Exported (3) Mercury Consumption Adjusted for Exports Residues Residues Total Discarded Discarded Discards in First in Fifth in Year (4) Year (5) Residues e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e 3.0 e (6) e 0.5 e (1) Bureau of Mines. Minerals Yearbook (Reference 44). (2) Manufacturing losses assumed to be 6 percent (Reference 10). (3) Percent of water-based paints exported calculated by Franklin Associates based on shipments and exports of water-based paints in thousand gallons (References 35 and 36). (4) Assumes that 90% of paint is applied in year of manufacture and 1% remains in cans discarded the same year. (5) Assumes that 10% of paint is never applied and is discarded 5 years after manufacture on average. (6) Although discards would be zero if all paint residues containing mercury were in fact discarded in 5 years, some will likely still be present in NA = Not available. e = Estimated by Franklin Associates, Ltd. 2-18

52 until 1990, the industry had begun reformulating its paints to eliminate mercury much earlier (37). Mercury in paint residues in MSW should gradually disappear following the ban on use of mercury (Figure 2-5). This process could be accelerated by increased household hazardous waste collection programs, although this factor was not included in the estimates. Assumptions and Data for Estimating Mercury Discards in Paint Residues 1. Mercury consumption in paints was based on data from the Bureau of Mines. 2. Consumption was adjusted downward by a 6 percent factor to account for manufacturing losses (1 O). 3. Consumption was adjusted downward to account for exports of waterbased paints, which could have contained mercury. Data on imports of water-based paints were not available, but overall, imports of paints amount to less than 10 percent of exports (35), so the amounts of mercury in imports of paints should be very small. 3. It was assumed that 90 percent of paint containing mercury would be applied to a surface the same year it is manufactured. 4. It was assumed that after paint is applied, one percent would remain and would be disposed along with the containers the same year. 5. It was assumed that 10 percent of the paint containing mercury would never be applied to a surface, but would be discarded in unopened or partially empty cans five years after manufacture. 6. It was assumed that there is no significant recovery of mercury in discarded paint. FEVER THERMOMETERS While mercury is used in a wide variety of instruments, the only category of mercury instrument identified to be present in MSW in any quantity, due to its extremely common use and disposable nature, is the clinical mercury-in-glass thermometer, or fever thermometer. Numbers of clinical thermometers produced and imported each year were obtained from U.S. Department of Commerce records (38, 39) (Table 2-7). 2-19

53 short tons l Figure 2-5. Discards of mercury in paint residues, 1970 to The number of thermometers imported relative to the number produced domestically has increased significantly in the past few years. This trend is expected to continue. The quantity of thermometer exports could not be identified and is assumed to be negligible, since fever thermometers are a low cost item that is assumed to be produced and sold more cheaply by other countries than the U.S. Clinical thermometers are assumed to be 100 percent mercury in glass up to 1984 and 67 percent mercury (33 percent digital) from 1984 through Mercury thermometers are estimated to lose one to 2 percent of market share to digital thermometers each year after The quantity of mercury per thermometer was determined experimentally by purchasing different brands and models of thermometers, breaking them, and weighing the mercury. The average weight of mercury in a standard oral/rectal/baby thermometer was 0.61 grams (based on a sample of two), and the average weight of mercury in a basal temperature thermometer was 2.25 grams (two samples). Considering the limited number of samples, these weights should be considered to be approximate. In calculating the weight of mercury in thermometers, it was estimated that 95 percent of clinical thermometers are oral/rectal/baby and 5 percent are basal temperature thermometers. Some mercury in thermometers is lost due to breakage before the thermometers are disposed of in MSW. A breakage factor of 5 percent was used (40). The life expectancy used was 5 years. 2-20

54 Table 2-7 DISCARDS OF MERCURY IN THERMOMETERS (In short tons) Mercury Total Mercury Mercury in Discarded in Year Year Thermometers (1) Thermometers (2) Thermometers (3) Thermometers (4) Dis- Produced (million units) (million units) (short tons) (short tons) carded (5) e e (1) Prod uction and imports from U.S. Department of Commerce. (2) Assumes digital thermometers begin to take market share in (3) Assumes 95% of thermometers contain 0.61 grams of mercury; 5% contain 2.25 grams. (4) Assumes 5% loss of mercury through breakage. (5) Assumes 5-year life for thermometers. e - Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate. Details may not add to totals due to rounding Mercury in MSW from thermometers is expected to decrease gradually over the next decade, due mainly to an increasing market share of digital thermometers, used primarily in doctors offices, hospitals, and clinics, and to new products such as color-changing fever indicators used mainly at home (Figure 2-6). Most fever thermometers in residential use are expected to continue to use mercury, because of the higher cost of digital thermometers and the relatively infrequent home use of fever thermometers. The total number of thermometers is expected to remain essentially constant, with increases in demand as population increases being offset by decreases in quantities of thermometers due to the longer life of digital thermometers. It is estimated that digital thermometers will gain an additional one to 2 percent of the market each each from 1990 through 2000, and the mercury content of mercury thermometers will remain constant. 2-21

55 Short tons Figure 2-6. Discards of mercury In thermometers in MSW, 1970 to Assumptions and Data for Estimating Mercury Discards in Fever Thermometers Data on production and imports of fever thermometers were obtained from U.S. Department of Commerce publications. It was assumed that there are no significant exports. Average weight of mercury in thermometers was obtained experimentally, and was estimated to be 0.61 grams per instrument for oral/rectal/baby thermometers and 2.25 grams per instrument for basal temperature thermometers. It was estimated that 95 percent of clinical thermometers are oral/rectal/baby and 5 percent are basal temperature. A breakage factor of 5 percent was used. Thermometers were assumed to have a 5-year life. It was assumed that there is no significantrecovery of mercury from clinical thermometers. It was assumed that digital (non-mercury) thermometers began to replace mercury thermometers in 1985 and that mercury thermometers will continue to lose market share by one to 2 percent per year after Projections were made assuming that the total number of fever thermometers will remain essentially constant because increases in population will be offset by the longer life of digital thermometers. 2-22

56 RESIDENTIAL THERMOSTATS The only category of electrical mercury device considered to make an appreciable contribution to mercury in MSW is the residential mercury thermostat. This category also includes mercury thermostats used in comfort heating of non-residential buildings such as schools, hospitals, and office buildings. A telephone survey of heating and air conditioning system repair shops in a metropolitan area indicated that no special disposal methods are used for mercury thermostats (41). In the past decade, mercury thermostats have begun to be replaced by programmable electronic thermostats, which do not contain mercury. The trend toward programmable thermostats is driven by the potential for saving energy and lowering utility bills; however, some consumers resist because of the substantially higher cost of programmable devices over mercury. Industry sales figures were not available for thermostats, so numbers were estimated using construction and housing data (42), information from thermostat manufacturers (43, 44, 45), and the assumptions below. Assumptions and Data for Estimating Mercury Discards in Residential Thermostats 1. Numbers of thermostats were estimated based on an assumption of one thermostat for every 1000 square feet of new construction, and new construction data from Statistical Abstract of the United States (42). 2. Quantity of mercury in each thermostat was estimated to be 2.82 grams, based on experimental data. 3. It was assumed that there are no net imports or exports of thermostats containing mercury. 4. It was assumed that mercury thermostats have a lifetime of 20 years before disposal. 5. It was assumed that there is no significant recovery of mercury from thermostats, and that this will not change. 6. Projections of new construction were made using a five-year average of new construction. Programmable thermostats were assumed to have entered the new construction market in 1985 with approximately 5 percent of the market, and to gain an additional one percent each year through

57 No information in the literature or from industrial sources was obtained on the amount of mercury in each thermostat. Therefore, this quantity was obtained experimentally by purchasing several different brands and models of mercury thermostats, breaking the mercury tubes, and weighing the mercury. For the sample of six mercury tubes weighed, the mean weight of mercury was 2.82 grams, with a standard deviation of 0.04 grams (Table 2-8). Table 2-8 DISCARDS OF MERCURY IN THERMOSTATS (In short tons) Year Installed New Thermostats Installed (1) (million units) Total Mercury in New Thermostats (2) (short tons) Enters MSW in Year (3) (1) Calculated based on one thermostat per 1000 square feet of new construction or mobile home. - Source Statistical Abstract of the United States (42). (2) Quantity of mercury in each thermostat estimated to be 2.82 grams. (3) Lifetime of mercury thermostats assumed to be 20 years. Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd. 2-24

58 Since new construction varies widely from year to year and trends are unpredictable, the average number of new thermostats installed (based on the average square feet of new construction and number of mobile homes) over the last 5 years was used as an estimate for the number of new thermostats installed each year for 1989 to Programmable (non-mercury) thermostats are estimated to have entered the new construction market in 1985 with approximately 5 percent of the market, gaining an additional one percent each year through Because of the 20-year life expectancy of thermostats, significant changes in the quantity of mercury in MSW from replaced thermostats will not be seen until after the year 2000 (Figure 2-7). I Figure 2-7. Discards of mercury In thermostats in MSW, 1970 to 2000 Short tons PIGMENTS Mercury has a long history of use in the pigment industry. Mercury sulfide, in the form of cinnabar ore, has been used as a colorant since antiquity. Mercury sulfide compounds are still being incorporated into orange and red pigments today. Various types of pigments are described in the following section. Cadmium-Mercury Pigments* Cadmium-mercury sulfides are manufactured in two grades, concentrate and lithopone. The lithopone contains BaS04, a common extender pigment. Information obtained for this study indicates that * The primary source of data in this section is the Colour Index (Reference 46). 2-25

59 cadmium-mercury pigments are no longer manufactured in the United States, but they are distributed in this country by a worldwide supplier. Cadmium-mercury sulfide pigments are stable to temperatures around 700 degrees Fahrenheit. They are widely used in plastics, although they are not recommended for exterior use. Other uses of cadmium-mercury pigments include paints, enamels, printing inks, rubber, paper and textile printing. Mercuric Sulfide Mercuric sulfide pigment, commonly called English vermilion, is manufactured synthetically, although mercuric sulfide does occur naturally as cinnabar ore. The use of vermilion has declined significantly in the past two decades. It has been almost entirely displaced by the less expensive and more reliable cadmium reds (47). Mercuric sulfide has been employed in inks, rubber, and elastomers as well as in artists colors. Mercuric Oxide The major use of mercuric oxide pigment in recent history was as an anti-fouling agent in marine paints. Commercially, red and yellow mercuric oxides are prepared synthetically beginning with mercurous nitrate and mercuric nitrate, respectively. Red mercuric oxide was generally preferred for anti-fouling paints because of its larger crystalline structure. The use of mercuric oxide declined after World War II due to evidence of its lack of effectiveness for commercial vessels. In 1972 the use of mercury compounds in antifouling paints was banned by the EPA. Mercuric oxide finds some use in the cosmetics industry as an antibacterial agent. There is no evidence in the literature that it is used as a pigment for cosmetics. Mercurous Arsenate Mercury-arsenic compounds were used for antifouling purposes in marine paints. These compounds were also banned from use in marine paints in Mercurous Chloride Mercurous chloride is widely used as a catalyst for the preparation of red and yellow mercuric oxide, ammoniated mercury USP, mercuric iodide, and as an intermediate in organic synthesis. No uses as a pigment were found in the literature. 2-26

60 Consumption of Mercury in Cadmium-Mercury Pigments Cadmium-mercury pigments are one of three cadmium-containing pigments used and are the primary pigment use of mercury. No published figures for the consumption of mercury in the production of pigments were found. Therefore, estimates were calculated using the numbers reported by the Bureau of Mines for pigment consumption of cadmium. Six different hues of cadmium-mercury pigments are manufactured, ranging from deep orange to maroon. Each of these hues contains a unique ratio of cadmium sulfide and mercury sulfide. The ratios are listed in Table 2-9. Approximately 80 percent of all cadmium pigments are used in plastics and about 17 percent of these will be cadmium-mercury (49). Table 2-9 RATIO OF CdS:HgS IN CADMIUM-MERCURY PIGMENTS Hue Ratio (wt %) Deep orange 89.1 :10.9 Light red 83.4 :16.6 Medium light red 81.0 :19.0 Medium red 78.5 :21.5 Dark red 76.1 :23.9 Maroon 73.5 :26.5 Source: The Pigment Handbook (47, 48) Using the low and high ends, the cadmium metal content will range from 57.2 percent by weight for maroon to 69.2 percent by weight for deep orange. Dividing the cadmium consumption in cadmium-mercury pigments by each metal content percentage leads to a range for the total amount of the pigment consumed in the United States minus imports. This is shown in Table This range is converted into a range for mercury metal consumption by multiplying by 22.8 percent by weight for maroon and 9.4 percent by weight for deep orange (Table 2-11). Overall, the trend in consumption of these pigments has been downward (Figure 2-8). Consumption of Mercury in Other Pigments While it believed that most mercury in pigments is used in plastics, there are some other uses as mentioned above. Data quantifying these other 2-27

61 Table 2-10 CONSUMPTION OF CADMIUM-MERCURY PIGMENTS (In short tons) Cadmium Cadmium Cadmium Consumption Consumption Total Cadmium-Mercury Pigments (4) Consumption (1) in Pigments in Cadmium-Hg For 69.2% Cad- For 57.2% Cad- Year in Pigments for Plastics (2) Pigments (3) mium Content mium Content (1) Bureau of Mines. Minerals Yearbook. (2) 80% of total cadmium in pigments consumption. (3) 17% of cadmium consumption in pigments in plastics. (4) These numbers represent the range of total cadmium-mercury pigments consumed in each respective year. (For 1970: /0.692 = ) Source Franklin Associates, Ltd uses were not found, so the mercury consumption in pigments in plastics was adjusted upwards by an assumed 10 percent to account for other uses (Table 2-12). Other Adjustments Domestic mercury consumption was adjusted downward by 6 percent to account for losses in the manufacturing process (10). It is known that some pigments containing mercury are imported, and an adjustment to account for imports was made (48). 2-28

62 Table 2-11 CONSUMPTION OF MERCURY IN PIGMENTS IN PLASTICS Year Total Cadmium-Mercury pigments (1) For 69.2% Cad- For 57.2% Cadmium Content mium Content Mercury in Cadmium- Mercury pigments (2) 9.4% 22.8% Average Domestic Mercury in Pigments In Plastics (3) (1) From Table (2) When the cadmium content is 69.2% of the pigment, the mercury content is 9.4% of the pigment. (Example: x 0.094= ) Also, when the-cadmium content is 57.2% of the pigment, the mercury content is 22.8%. (Balance is sulfur.) (3) The estimated consumption of mercury in pigments is the average of the high and low values shown in the previous two columns. Source Franklin Associates, Ltd. Short tons 60 Figure 2-8. Discards of mercury in pigments in MSW, 1970 to l

63 Table 2-12 DISCARDS OF MERCURY IN PIGMENTS (In short tons) Year Average Mercury c onsumption in Pigments (1) In Plastics Adjustment for Non-plastic Uses (2) Domestic Mercury consumption in Pigments Manufacturing Losses (3) Adjustment for Imports/ Exports (4) Discards of Mercury into MSW (5) e e e (1) From Table (2) Mercury entering MSW from pigments used in non-plastic applications is assumed to be 10 percent of the mercury consumed for pigments used in plastics. (3) Estimated to be 6 percent. (4) Derived from Table 3-10 of Reference 10. (5) Domestic consumption - manufacturing losses + net imports e - estimated by Franklin Associates, Ltd. No data were found to use in estimating the lifetime of products containing mercury pigments, so it was assumed that the products are discarded the same year they are produced. While this is probably not correct in all cases, annual fluctuations until very recently were not large, so the error introduced by this assumption should not be large. There are strong pressures to reduce or eliminate all heavy metals from pigments (50, 51), and the general trend is believed to be downward. 2-30

64 Since domestic production of pigments containing mercury was discontinued in 1988, it was assumed that cadmium-mercury pigments will continue to be imported, but that use will decline in the future. Assumptions and Data for Estimating Mercury Discards in Pigments Reliable data on use of mercury in pigments were not found. Mercury in pigments used in plastics was estimated based on the amount of cadmium used in pigments in plastics. An adjustment upward by an assumed 10 percent was made to account for pigments in non-plastic uses. Manufacturing losses were assumed to be 6 percent. Products containing mercury in pigments were assumed to be discarded the same year they are produced. It was assumed that there is no recovery of these products. It was assumed that there will be a continuing decline in use of mercury and other heavy metals in pigments. DENTAL USES Dental uses have accounted for 2 to 4 percent of total U.S. mercury consumption since 1980 (generally 3 to 6 percent before 1980) (52). Dental amalgams used to fill cavities in teeth are approximately 50 percent mercury by weight. For economic reasons, it has long been common practice for dentists to collect and save amalgam material (including excess prepared for fillings, scrapings from packing the fillings, and recovered fillings from extracted teeth) and sell the material to collectors, who in turn sell the material to mercury refiners (33). Mercury that is not collected, or mercury in the form of lost fillings or teeth containing fillings, is very likely to end up in MSW (54, 55). No more than 10 percent of dental mercury is estimated to enter MSW in the form of lost fillings, teeth containing fillings, and amalgam material that has not been collected by dentists. Of this 10 percent, it is assumed that 8 percent is not collected by dentists and enters MSW the same year of its reported use, and the remaining 2 percent from lost fillings and teeth containing fillings enters MSW 10 years after its reported use. To calculate the amount of dental mercury in MSW each year, 8 percent of the Bureau of Mines consumption figure for that year was added to 2 percent of the Bureau of Mines consumption figure for 10 years earlier (Table 2-13). 2-31

65 Table 2-13 DISCARDS. OF DENTAL MERCURY Year Mecury Consumption in Dental Uses (1) (pounds) 230, , , , , , , / , , , , , , , , ,240 93,480 38,912 60, / ,588 77, , , , , ,432 85,956 Mercury Not Collected by Dentists (2) (pounds) 13,899 14,355 18,137 16,288 18,386 14,227 12,099 7,478 3,113 4,821 10,816 9,807 6,196 9,710 8,707 8,780 9,163 9, ,876 Mercury in Mercury Lost Teeth & Discarded from Fillings (3) Dental Uses (4) (pounds) (short tons) 4,620 5,329 5,139 5,670 6,571 5,255 3,242 3,627 4,680 4,378 3,475 3,589 4,534 4,072 4,596 3,557 3,025 1, , (1) Bureau of Mines. (2) Estimated to be 8% of current year consumption. (3) Estimated to be 2% of consumption 10 years previous. (4) Sum of mercury not collected by dentists and in lost teeth and fillings. Projections assume a 5 percent reduction per year. Source: Franklin Associates, Ltd. 2-32

66 Assumptions and Data for Estimating Mercury Discards from Dental Uses 1. Annual dental use of mercury was obtained from data published by the U.S. Bureau of Mines. 2. Information obtained indicates that most excess amalgam containing mercury is recovered in dentists offices. Therefore it was assumed that 8 percent of dental mercury used annually is discarded from dentists offices. 3. It was assumed that 2 percent of the annual use of dental mercury is discarded 10 years later as lost filling and teeth containing fillings. 4. Information obtained indicates that use of dental mercury has decreased due to a variety of reasons. It was assumed that mercury from dental amalgams in MSW will decrease 5 percent each year from 1990 to Dental mercury in MSW has decreased significantly in the past few years and can be expected to continue to decrease (Figure 2-9). Factors causing this decrease include more effective cavity prevention (better awareness of the importance of dental hygiene, water fluoridation, and protective coatings for children s teeth), development and increasing use of alternate dental materials such as plastics and ceramics, and increasing awareness of the environmental and health effects of mercury, leading to more careful use and collection of mercury and amalgam waste. It is estimated that mercury from dental amalgams in MSW will decrease approximately 5 percent each year from 1990 to 2000 (Table 2-13). Short tons 12 Figure 2-9. Discards of mercury in dental uses in MSW, 1970 to

67 SPECIAL PAPER COATING Mercury bromide and mercury acetic and are used in the coating of a specialized paper and film. The coating, which also contains silver, is applied to paper that is used when scanning off a cathode ray tube. A very high resolution is obtained from the process. This type of printing occurs in hospitals and newspaper publishing, and is utilized in microfiche printers (56). Two companies manufacture the paper and film. Consumption of mercury for this application is estimated as shown in Table Plans are being developed to phase out the use of mercury in the coating, and it is predicted that by 1995, mercury will be eliminated entirely from use in this application (57). Table 2-14 MERCURY DISCARDS IN SPECIAL PAPER COATING (In short tons) Year Consumption/ Discards e e e e - estimated by Franklin Associates, Ltd. Source: Industrial source. 2-34

68 Only a small amount of the paper having this coating is recycled. Quantities of this type of paper waste have been collected to recover the silver, but this does not occur often (56). Therefore, it is assumed that all the mercury consumed in the production of this paper is discarded into the municipal solid waste stream. ) Assumptions and Data for Estimating Mercury Discards from Special Paper Coating Data on use of mercury in special paper coatings were obtained from an industry source. It was assumed that the coated paper is discarded the same year it is produced. It was assumed that a negligible amount of this paper is recycled. It was assumed that use of mercury in this paper will be eliminated by MERCURY ELECTRIC LIGHT SWITCHES Mercury electric light switches have been manufactured since the 1960s, with less than one million produced each year (58) (Table 2-15). The switches could be used wherever lighting is used, e.g., homes, apartments, offices, schools, etc. The mercury is inside a metal encapsulation, which is not subject to breakage and is unlikely to leak. Based on the device s design and applications, the estimated life expectancy is 50 years or more. Of course, some number of switches will be discarded before the end of their useful life for some reason like renovation or demolition of homes in which they are installed. A few will also be discarded due to leakage or some other failure. Based on information from industrial sources, it was estimated that the mercury in each switch weighs 3.5 grams. Reliable information on discards of mercury switches was not available, so assumptions were made as follows: 10 percent discarded 10 years after production, 40 percent discarded after 30 years, and the remaining 50 percent discarded after 50 years. Actual quantities discarded will be less than estimates shown in Table 2-15, since production has been less than one million per year and is in decline, and some quantities of switches are used in non-residential applications and would not end up in municipal solid waste. 2-35

69 Table 2-15 DISCARDS OF MERCURY IN SWITCHES (In short tons) Year Mercury Switch Production (Units) (1) Weight of Mercury in Switches (Tons) (2) Weight of Discarded (Tons) (3) ,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000, ,000, ,000, (1) Assumption of one million switches produced per year based on information from an industrial source. Actual production is less. (2) Weight of mercury per switch is 3.5 grams (based on information from an industrial source). (3) Assumption that 10% are discarded after 10 years; 40% after 30 years; and 50% after 50 years. 2-36

70 Assumptions and Data for Estimating Mercury Discards in Mercury Electric Light Switches 1. Information on numbers of switches produced and weight of mercury in switches was obtained from industrial sources. No adjustments were made for imports or exports. 2. It was assumed that 10 percent of switches are discarded after 10 years, 40 percent after 30 years, and the remaining 50 percent after 50 years. 3. It was assumed that there is no recycling of mercury from switches discarded in MSW. INSTANT CAMERA FILM PACK BATTERIES Instant picture photography was introduced in 1948 (59). Improvements in the technology led to the development of an integral film camera that ejects the film from the camera for immediate automatic processing and instant pictures. The motor in the camera is powered by a battery that is included in the film pack to insure a fresh power source at all times (60). The cell is a carbon-zinc battery with a zinc anode that until 1987 utilized mercury to prevent the generation of hydrogen (61). According to the manufacturer, the quantity of mercury in the film pack batteries was reduced in 1987, and in April 1988 all mercury was removed from the film pack batteries (59). Assumptions and Data for Estimating Mercury Discards from Film Pack Batteries 1. Data on use of mercury in film pack batteries came from an industrial source. 2. It was assumed that 10 percent of U.S. households own instant cameras, and that each camera owner uses 8 packs of film per year, and discards the batteries the same year they are purchased. 3. It was assumed that there is no recycling of the mercury in these batteries. 4. Based on information from the manufacturer, it was assumed that mercury was eliminated from these batteries after

71 The estimated amount of mercury discharged into the municipal waste stream due to disposal of these film packs is given in Table Ten percent of all U.S. households owned instant cameras in 1986 (62). This percentage was applied to all years. It was assumed that each owner of an instant camera would use eight packs of Polaroid film containing the carbon-zinc battery per year and that all disposal would be into the municipal solid waste stream. It was assumed that there is no recycling or reuse of the batteries or film packs. Table 2-16 DISCARDS OF MERCURY FROM INSTANT CAMERA FILM PACK BATTERIES Year Households Instant Cameras in Us. (1) Owned(2) 63,401,000 64,944,800 e 66,488,600 e 68,032,400 e 69,576,200 e 71,120,000 73,051,200 e 74,982,400 e 76,913,600 e 78,844,800 e 80,776,000 81,823,333 e 82,870,667 e 83,918,000 85,407,000 86,789,000 88,458,000 89,479,000 90,500,000 e 91,521,000 e 6,340,100 6,494,480 6,648,860 6,803,240 6,957,620 7,112,000 7,305,120 7,498,240 7,691,360 7,884,480 8,077,600 8,182,333 8,287,067 8,391,800 8,540,700 8,678,900 8,845,800 8,947,900 9,050,000 9,152,100 Film Packs Used(3) 50,720,800 51,955,840 53,190,880 54,425,920 55,660,960 56,896,000 58,440,960 59,985,920 61,530,880 63,075,840 64,620,800 65,458,666 66,296,534 67,134,400 68,325,600 69,431,200 70,766,400 71,583,200 72,400,000 73,216,800 Net Discards of Mercury) (grams) 1,876,670 1,922,366 1,968,063 2,013,759 2,059,456 2,105,152 2,162,316 2,219,479 2,276,643 2,333, ,970 2,421,971 2,452,972 2,483,973 2,528,047 2,568,954 2,618,357 2,648,578 1,375,600 0 Net Discards of Mercury (short tons) (1) Bureau of the Census, United States Department of Commerce. (2) 10% of households own instant cameras (59). (3) Assumed that 8 film packs are used per camera annually. (4) Batteries in each film pack contained grams of mercury through 1987; grams in Mercury was eliminated after e - Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate. DISCONTINUED USES OF MERCURY IN MSW In the research for this report, a number of uses for mercury in products that would have discarded into municipal solid waste in the past (prior to 1970) were identified. These uses are summarized here without any attempt to quantify these earlier discards. 2-38

72 Mirrors Potassium tetracyanomercurate (II) was formerly used in the manufacture of mirrors in the silver coating. The mercury compound prevented yellowing of the coating (6). This procedure has not been utilized for 50 years (63). Glass Mercuric oxide was formerly used as a modifier in the manufacture of glass under highly specialized conditions only (64). No recent information about this application was found. Felt Mercury (II) acetate was formerly used in the treatment of felt to help resist against shrinking and to improve the felting qualities of the fur (65). New technology was developed to enable the use of other chemicals that would give the same properties as mercury. As a result, mercury was removed from the manufacture of felt in the 1950s (66). Textiles Mercury compounds are allowed by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) for the fungicidal treatment of textiles and fabrics intended for continuous outdoor use (67). Currently, no manufacturers are using mercury fungicides (68). Paper Products Mercury compounds were formerly used as slimicides in the production of paper. They prevented the growth of green slime on the manufacturing equipment and the growth of mold and bacteria on pulp during the months of damp storage (69). In 1964, the Food and Drug Administration ruled that no mercury residues could appear in paper food packages. This led to the elimination of the use of mercury in most American paper mills due to the uncertainty as to which starting batches of pulp would end up as paper packages for food (64). Currently, mercury or mercury compounds are not allowed for use as a slimicide under FIFRA (67). The Bureau of Mines reported consumption of mercury by the industry through 1972, when consumption approached zero (Table 2-17). It is assumed 2-39

73 Table 2-17 CONSUMPTION OF MERCURY IN PAPER MANUFACTURE (In short tons) Year Mercury Consumed 1% % Source: U.S. Bureau of Mines (47). that some of this mercury ended up in the municipal solid waste stream in the past. Further evidence that mercury is not currently used in the manufacture of paper was found in the published results of tests conducted at Pennsylvania State University to determine the safety of using newspapers as animal bedding (70). While the presence of several heavy metals was detected (generally at far below the levels allowed in livestock feed), no mercury was detected in newspapers (printed with black and colored inks), in glossy print advertising, in copier paper, or in computer printout. 2-40

74 Chapter 2 REFERENCES 1. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines. Mineral Facts and Problems Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, Vol Hutton, M. Human Health Concerns of Lead, Mercury, Cadmium and Arsenic. In Lead, Mercury, Cadmium and Arsenic in the Environment, edited by T. C. Hutchinson and K.M. Meema. John Wiley & Sons U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Fact Sheet: Mercury Biocides in Paint. July U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. Mercury. July Windholz, Martha, ed. The Merck Index, 10th Edition. Merck and Co., Inc Arthur D. Little, Inc. Marketing Development Strategies for Recyclable Materials. July Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Environment Committee. Fate of Small Quantities of Hazardous Waste. August Taylor, Kevin, Hurd, David, and Rohan, Brian. Recycling in the 1980s: Batteries Not Included. Resource Recycling May/June Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Products Containing Lead and Cadmium in Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, , Working Papers. October 17, Kirk-Othmer. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 3rd ed. John Wiley and Sons, Crompton, T. R. Small Batteries, Primary Cells, Vol. 2. John Wiley and Sons, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Household Batteries in Minnesota: Interim Report of the Household Battery Recycling and Disposal Study. March

75 NH/VT Solid Waste Project. Household Battery Collection Program. July Linden, David ed. Handbook of Batteries and Fuel Cells. McGraw-Hill, Wehrenberg, Robert H. New Battery Materials Bring Power to the Power. Metals Engineering. August Conversation with representative of a battery manufacturer. June 25, National Electrical Manufacturers Association. Disposal of Household Batteries. Meeting with representatives of National Electrical Manufacturers Association. June 18, Letter from a representative of an industrial firm. July 11, Facsimile letter from a representative of the American Watch Association. July 19, Conversation with representative of an industrial firm. July 31, Conversation with a representative of the U. S. Department of Commerce. July 30, Conversation with representative of an industrial firm. July 23, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Household Batteries in Minnesota Interim Report of the Household Battery Recycling and Disposal Study Reutlinger, Nancy, and de Grassi, Dan. Household battery recycling: numerous obstacles, few solutions. Resource Recycling. April Conversation with representative of an industrial firm. July 17, Minnesota House of Representatives and Senate. An Act to Limit Disposal of Certain Dry Cell Batteries and Set Battery Requirements. Chapter No H.F. No

76 29. Kaufman, John E., Editor. IES Lighting Handbook, 1987 Application Volume and 1984 Reference Volume. Published by the Illuminating Engineers Society of North America. New York. 30. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. Electric Lamps and earlier years. 31. Telephone conversations with representative of an industrial corporation. June 13 and July 18, Telephone conversations with representatives of an industrial corporation and the National Electrical Manufacturers Association. November 6, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs. Environmental Fact Sheet - Mercury Biocides in Paint. July U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Communications and Public Affairs. Mercury Use in Exterior Paints and Coatings Canceled. Environmental News. May 22, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. Paint, Varnish and Lacquer. 36. U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Exports for Consumption Rich, Susan, ed. The Kline Guide to the Paint Industry, 6th Ed. Charles H. Kline and Co. Inc U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Current Industrial Reports. Selected Instruments and Related Products and earlier years. 39. U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Imports for Consumption and General Imports, FT and earlier years. 40. Telephone survey of U.S. thermometer manufacturers. June 7-20, Telephone survey of Kansas City area heating and air conditioning repair shop. July 18, U.S. Department of Commerce. Statistical Abstract of the United States and earlier years. 43. Telephone conversation with representative of an industrial corporation. July 26,

77 44. Telephone conversation with representative of an industrial corporation. August 1, Telephone conversation with representative of an industrial corporation. August 2, 1990., 46. The Society of Dyers and Colorists. Colour Index, 3rd Edition, Vol Patton, Temple C. Pigment Handbook, Vol. 1,2,3. J. Wiley & Sons Lewis, Peter A. Pigment Handbook, Vol. 2, 2nd Edition. J. Wiley& Sons Plastics Engineering. April Kirkland, C. Shop Wisely for Heavy-metal-free Colorants. Plastics World. October Pigments and Dyes: Adapting to New Environments. Chemical Week. October 3, Bureau of Mines. Minerals Yearbook and earlier years. 53. Telephone conversations with a representative of Mercury Refining Company. June 14 and July 18, Council on Dental Materials, Instruments, & Equipment. Recommendations in dental mercury hygiene, Journal of the American Dental Association, Volume 109. October Telephone conversation with representative of Missouri Department of Natural Resources. June 7, Conversation with representative of an industrial firm. August 2, Conversation with representative of an industrial firm. August 28, Conversation with representative of an industrial firm. August 1, Conversation with representative of an industrial firm. June 11, Snap-happy Polaroid Offers Mercury-Free Pictures. New Scientist, Vol October 15,

78 61. Gibbons, J. Facing America s Trash, What Next for Municipal Solid Waste? Office of Technology Assessment, Congress of the United States. 62. Edmondson, B. Polaroid Snaps the Customer. American Demographics, Vol. 9. February Letter from a representative of the National Association of Mirror Manufacturers, June 22, Kirk-Othmer. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 3rd cd., Vol. 11. John Wiley and Sons, Kirk-Othmer. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 3rd cd., Vol. 24. John Wiley and Sons, Conversation with a representative of an industrial firm. June 4, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Compliance Monitoring, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Suspended, Cancelled, and Restricted Pesticides. February Conversation with a representative of the National Pesticide Communication Network. June 15, Montague, Katherine and Peter. Mercury. Sierra Club Temple, Guy. Newsprint Gets Farmer and Livestock-OK. BioCycle. September

79 Chapter 3 MERCURY IN NON-MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE PRODUCTS INTRODUCTION It is often difficult to classify products as to whether or not they are municipal solid waste (MSW), especially when dealing with a substance like mercury that may be present in very small quantities. In preparing this report, mercury-containing products have been included in Chapter 2 if they meet the usual definition of municipal solid waste-wastes discarded from residences and commercial establishments and certain wastes such as packaging discarded from industrial establishments. Other wastes such as agricultural wastes, construction and demolition wastes, industrial process wastes, military wastes such as explosives, and most transportation wastes are not classified as MSW by EPA. Wastes from those sources may, however, be discarded in municipal solid waste landfills or incinerators. Therefore, those kinds of wastes that could be identified to contain mercury, currently or in the past, are described in this chapter. They are not quantified nor are they included in the summary tables characterizing mercury in MSW. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS Agricultural use of mercury and mercury compounds has been greatly limited by government regulations in the last 18 years. Originally used extensively for seed disinfectants applied before planting and for other agricultural treatments to protect against diseases and insects, mercury pesticides were eliminated from use on food crops in 1972 (l). In 1978, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) was amended regarding the use of mercury and other chemicals (2). Based on these amendments, the only agricultural applications now allowed for mercury are in fungicides used for treatment of textiles and fabrics intended for continuous outdoor use, to control brown mold on freshly sawn lumber, to control Dutch elm disease, as a preservative in water-based paints, and to control winter turf diseases such as snow mold (3). Additional amendments to FIFRA have prohibited the import of food containing residues of banned pesticides. Also, the United States is required to notify foreign countries of health hazards before exporting canceled or restricted pesticides (4). 3-1

80 PAINTS Mercury compounds were formerly used as bioades or preservatives in the production of different forms of paint. However, regulatory actions taken by EPA in 1990 and 1991 cancelled all registrations for the use of mercury in paints for interior and exterior purposes. In spite of these actions, mercurycontaining paints manufactured before 1990 or 1991 may still be discarded, and surfaces coated with these paints will be in use for many years. Mercury was formerly used in two categories of paints. Marine antifouling paints utilized mercury as a biocide after application. Latex paints relied on mercury for biocidal properties and, in addition, used the compounds as a preservative during storage. A discussion of these two types of paints follows. Antifouling Paints Mercury compounds were a few of a small number of biocides found to be useful in antifouling paints. Antifouling paints are coatings that are applied on the bottom of ships to hinder the growth of algae and similar organisms. They work by releasing a toxin into the laminar layer of water surrounding the ship (5). In March of 1972, the use of mercury in marine paints for the purposes of antifouling was banned by the Environmental Protection Agency (6). It is assumed that none of this paint would enter the municipal waste stream. Any paint that is not applied to ships would be disposed of as industrial waste. Latex Paints Mercury compounds were used until recently in water-based latex paints as a biocide and a preservative. They helped to control bacterial and fungal growth and to prevent mildew attack after application in exterior paints (7). The following four mercury chemicals were formerly registered and used by various manufacturers to obtain the preserving properties (8): Phenylmercuric acetate (PMA) 3- (Chloromethoxy) propylmercuric acetate (CMPA) Di(phenylmercury) dodecenylsuccinate (PMDS) Phenylmercuric oleate (PMO) Mercury was primarily an additive in architectural coatings that are used on stationary structures, mobile homes, pavements, and curbs. Approximately 500 million gallons of architectural paint are produced per year, half of the one billion gallons of paints and coatings manufactured by 3-2

81 the entire industry. About 30 percent of all architectural coatings are oil-based systems that did not contain mercury. The remaining 70 percent are the water-based paints that often utilized mercury in the past (8). In July 1990, EPA issued a notice (8) that all registrations for use of three mercury compounds in paint (CMPA, PMDS, and PMO) had been voluntarily cancelled and that the registration of PMA for use in interior paints was also cancelled. In May 1991, EPA issued a notice (9) that the remaining registrations (for use of PMA in exterior paints) had also been voluntarily cancelled. Through these regulatory actions, therefore, no mercury is allowed in future manufacture of paints in the U.S. (The manufacturers are allowed to use their existing stocks of mercury compounds in the manufacture of paint under conditions permitting only exterior use.) Some paint will remain unused after purchase and could end up in one of three places upon disposal. First, the leftover paint could be handled by a household hazardous waste collection program (the recommended practice). Second, the paint could be poured down a drain or sewer and enter the waste water system. Finally, the paint residue could remain in the can and be discarded into the municipal solid waste stream. (Paint residues containing mercury are addressed in Chapter 2.) CATALYSTS FOR PLASTICS Mercury is or has been used in the catalysis of various plastics, including polyurethane, vinyl chloride, and vinyl acetate (10). Research for, this report indicates that some mercury does remain in certain polyurethanes, but that these end uses would not normally be classified as MSW. Most vinyl chloride is currently manufactured by a process that does not use mercury, and the mercury does not appear in the final product (10). Finally, use of mercury in the production of vinyl acetate apparently has been discontinued (11). It was assumed that no mercury used as a catalyst is discarded as MSW. CHLORINE AND CAUSTIC SODA PRODUCTION Mercury is used in its liquid form in the manufacturing process for the production of chlorine and caustic soda. It separates the brine into chlorine gas and sodium hydroxide. Mercury acts as the cathode in this electrolytic process. It flows along the bottom of the cell a few millimeters below the suspended metal anode. The aqueous solution of sodium chloride flows between the anode and the cathode, releasing chlorine gas at the anode. The sodium ions form an amalgam with the mercury cathode and flow out of the cell. Water is added to the amalgam to remove the sodium, forming hydrogen and sodium hydroxide. The mercury is then recycled back into the cell to be reused (12). 3-3

82 Since this is an industrial use of mercury, any wastes from the process would be classified as industrial wastes. It was assumed that none would enter the municipal solid waste stream. EXPLOSIVES Mercury compounds were used as primary explosives to initiate detonation (13). Mercury fulminate had the most common and greatest use. Mercuric thiocyanate was also used, specfically in fireworks called Pharaoh s Serpents (14). These mercury compounds produce very sensitive explosives and have not been used, with the exception of military applications, since before 1970 (15). In the military, use of mercury fulminate continued after consumer production stopped. It was only utilized in tiny amounts and has now essentially been replaced with other compounds. A new explosive based on mercury tetrazole has been developed, but its use is on a small scale and in research and development only (16). Based on this information, the conclusion is drawn that no mercury from explosives is entering the municipal waste stream or has in the past 20 years. All mercury for use in explosives is diverted to military uses. LABORATORY USES Mercury is used in laboratories in instruments, as reagents, and as catalysts for certain reactions. The disposal of mercury and mercury compounds is regulated on a federal level with additional regulations sometimes appearing at the state level as well (17). It is standard practice for labs to dispose of the mercury as hazardous waste to be sent to a hazardous waste landfill or a treatment, storage, or disposal facility. Also, the mercury can be sent for recovery if larger amounts are present (17). This method removes the need for hazardous waste disposal. Based on this information, it is assumed that no mercury from laboratories will appear in municipal solid waste. PHARMACEUTICALS Mercury is an ingredient in a variety of pharmaceutical products (14). The majority of the drugs are obtained for antiseptic purposes to be applied topically. Some veterinary drugs also utilize mercury. 3-4

83 While some mercury could be present in residual pharmaceutical products discarded into MSW, in accordance with previous practice in material flows characterizations, these amounts were not estimated. COSMETICS Mercury is used in cosmetics as a preservative or antimicrobial. Although employed prior to 1972 for many different applications, it has been limited by the food and Drug Administration since 1972 to eye-area ointments and cosmetics (18). Currently, two compounds comprise the majority of the mercury market in the cosmetic industry: mercuric oxide and thimerosal (19). They are limited to a maximum concentration of 60 parts per million in eye-area cosmetics and to only one part per million in others (20). Like pharmaceuticals, some residual mercury could be present in discarded cosmetics packages. In accordance with past practice, these amounts were not estimated for this report. ELECTRICAL APPARATUS Because of its unique properties, mercury finds use in a number of types of electrical apparatus. As a conductive metal that is a freely flowing liquid under a wide range of temperatures and pressures, mercury may be used to bridge connections in tilt switches, suppress bouncing on contact in rapidly operating switches and relays, or cushion impact and reduce wear while maintaining electrical continuity between contact points in electrical devices. The majority of electrical devices containing mercury are used in industrial or commercial equipment such as telephone switching systems and industrial temperature or pressure control systems, and are assumed to be disposed of in industrial waste rather than MSW. Manufacturers of electrical apparatus containing mercury also commonly recover and recycle mercury from defective devices (their own production and returns from customers). It is thus highly unlikely for mercury from most electrical devices to find its way into MSW. The few exceptions would include devices such as silent mercury electric light switches and mercury thermostats that are used in residential and commercial buildings, where they would typically be replaced by homeowners or repairmen who would most likely dispose of them in MSW. These devices are included in Chapter

84 DISCONTINUED USES OF MERCURY IN NON-MSW APPLICATIONS Embalming Mercuric chloride was once used as an embalming fluid (14). As a result of OSHA regulations, no large companies are using this chemical at this time. Documentation of the use of arsenic exists from 40 years ago and it is possible that mercury was also utilized during that time (21). Photographic Development Mercuric iodide and mercuric chloride have been used in the development of black and white photographs. They were applied to intensify the image density of a negative that was underdeveloped (22). A mercuric chloride process involving potassium bromide and a silver nitrate/potassium cyanide solution was given the name of Monckhoven s treatment (23). Intensification is achieved by displacing the silver image of the negative with the more dense mercury compound. This process can be repeated for even greater intensification. If mercuric iodide was used, the finished image contained metallic mercury and mercuric iodide. Using mercuric chloride would leave only pure mercury with no mercuric chloride residue (23). Mercuric chloride is not used in color photography and has not been commonly used in black and white photography for over 25 years. Only references to the application of chromium intensifiers were noted (24). Soap Mercuric sodium p-phenolsulfonate has been used as a germicide and a skin lightening agent in soaps and lotions. The concentration ratio was usually 1:100 (14). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency does not mention any allowed use of mercury as a fungicide in the manufacture of soap in the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (25). The distribution of mercury soaps is also not allowed in the European Economic Cornmunity (EEc), but it can be and is manufactured in England for export to Africa (26). Treatment of Dutch Elm Disease Although the U.S. EPA allows the use of mercury and mercury compounds for the treatment and control of Dutch elm disease under FIFRA (25), this use has been essentially discontinued. Dutch elm disease is caused by a fungus that prevents water from flowing up from the roots. Trees infected with this disease wilt and die from the tops down. The fungus is spread from 3-6

85 tree to tree by elm bark beetles and connecting root systems (27). Once infected, the tree is usually removed to prevent further spreading of the disease. Mercury is not very effective in killing the beetle and might only be used to bring back resilient strains of the tree (28). Wood Preservatives The EPA allows the use of mercury as a fungicide to control brown mold on freshly sawn lumber (25). This use has not been common and is not supported by the trade associations for the lumber industry. Currently no lumber companies are known to be applying mercury to their lumber (29). 3-7

86 Chapter 3 REFERENCES 1. Meister, R., Editorial Director. Farm Chemical Handbook 86. Meister Publishing Co Conversation with Mary Jane Wiggett, Pesticides Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7. May 14, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Suspended, Cancelled, and Restricted (SCR) Pesticides. February Drabble, N. Testicide Legislation Reform: Accord Between Industry and Environmentalists. Environment. Vol. 27, No. 10. December Surface Coatings - Paints and Their Applications. Oil and Colour Chemists Association. Chapman and Hall Rich, Susan, ed. The Kline Guide to the Paint Industry, 6th Ed. Charles H. Kline and Co. Inc Questions and Answers About Mercury in Paint. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Press Release. June 29, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs. Environmental Fact Sheet - Mercury Biocides in Paint. July U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Communications and Public Affairs. Mercury Use in Exterior Paints and Coatings Canceled. Environmental News. May 22, Kirk-Othmer. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, 3rd cd., Vol. 23. John Wiley and Sons Conversation with representative of a chemical company. June 28, The Chlorine Institute. Safety Guidelines for the Manufacture of Chlorine. July Kirk-Othmer. Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, Vol. 9. 3rd ed. John Wiley and Sons Windholz, M., ed. The Merck Index. 10th ed. Merck and Co. Inc

87 15. Conversation with a representative of the American Pyrotechnics Association. June 5, Conversation with Dr. Richard Bowen, Energy Materials Research and Development, U.S. Navy. June 11, Conversation with a representative of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7, Compliance Department. July 5, U.S. Bureau of Mines. Minerals Yearbook, Vol. I, Metals and Minerals Letter from the Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. July 18, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development. Mercury. July Conversation with a representative of the Embalming Chemical Manufacturers Association, June 4, Mason, L. Photographic Processing Chemistry. The Focal Press John, D. and Field, G.T. Photographic Chemistry. Reinhold Publishing Corporation Conversation with a representative of a photographic company. May 24, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Compliance Monitoring, Office of Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Suspended, Cancelled, and Restricted Pesticides. February Mercury Peril from Soap Manufacture. New Scientist, Vol May 16, Thompson, H., Willis, W., and Keen, R. Controlling Dutch Elm Disease. Agricultural Experiment Station, Kansas State University. Undated. 28. Conversation with a representative of the National Pesticide Communication Network. June 15, Conversation with a representative of the National Forest Products Association. July 2,

88 Appendix A MATERIAL FLOWS METHODOLOGY The material flows methodology is illustrated in Figures A-1 and A-2. The crucial first step is making estimates of the generation of the materials and products in MSW (Figure A-l). DOMESTIC PRODUCTION Data on domestic production of materials and products are compiled for 1970 through 1988, using published data series. U.S. Department of Commerce sources are used where available, but in several instances more detailed information on production of goods by end use is available from trade associations. The goal is to obtain a consistent historical data series for each product and/or material. CONVERTING SCRAP The domestic production numbers are then adjusted for converting or fabrication scrap generated in the production processes. Examples of these kinds of scrap would be clippings from plants that make boxes from paperboard, glass scrap (cullet) generated in a glass bottle plant, or plastic scrap from a fabricator of plastic consumer products. This scrap typically has a high value because it is clean and readily identifiable, and it is almost always recovered and recycled within the industry that generated it. Thus, converting/fabrication scrap is not counted as part of the postconsumer recovery of waste. ADJUSTMENTS FOR IMPORTS/EXPORTS In some instances imports and exports of products are a significant part of MSW, and adjustments are made to account for this. DIVERSION Some consumer products are diverted from the municipal waste stream because of the way they are used. Adjustments are made to the data where appropriate to account for these kinds of uses. ADJUSTMENTS FOR PRODUCT LIFETIME Some products normally have a very short lifetime; these products are assumed to be discarded in the same year they are produced. In other A-1

89 instances, products have relatively long lifetimes. Data on average product lifetimes are used to adjust the data series to account for this. MUNICIPAL SOLID WASTE GENERATION AND DISCARDS The result of these estimates and calculations is a product-by-product estimate of mercury generation in products in MSW (Figure A-1). The term generation as used in this report thus refers to the weight of mercury in products as they enter the municipal waste stream before any recovery for recycling or any combustion takes place. Since very little recycling of mercury in MSW was identified, generation and discards are used interchangeably in this report, except where recovery in the future is projected. A-2

90 Domestic Production of Materials/Products Conversion/ fabricating scrap, 1 Imports of Materials/Products Exports of Materials/Products \ Diversion of Materials/Products v Municipal Solid Waste Generation Figure A-1. Material flows methodology for estimating generation of products and materials in municipal solid waste. A-3

91 MSW Generation I Recovery for Recycling Recovery for Comporting I I 4 Discards after Recycling and Comporting 1 Recovery for Combustion with Energy Recovery I A Recovery for Combustion without Energy Recovery I Discards to Landfiii and Other Disposai Figure A-2. Material flows methodology for estimating recovery and discards of municipal solid waste. A-4

92 Appendix B CONSUMPTION OF MERCURY Consumption of mercury in the United States as reported by the Bureau of Mines for the time period 1967 through 1990 is shown in Table B-1. The percentage of total consumption for each use is also shown. At various points during the time period covered, the Bureau of Mines changed the method of reporting mercury statistics. Therefore, certain categories were combined for part of the time and appeared individually during others. This is apparently a response to changes in consumption that occurred. Decreases and complete elimination of mercury use in certain products transpired as a result of increasing awareness of the dangers and toxicity of mercury and the implementation of federal regulations. Uses for mercury in 1967 that are no longer reported include antifouling paints, agricultural chemicals, amalgamation, and slimicide use in paper and pulp manufacturing. The top consumer of mercury varied over the years. Electrical uses, i.e., household batteries, dominated the market until the late 1980s. Chlorine and caustic soda production and mildew-proofing for paints took the majority of the remaining mercury. All other uses occupied one percent or less except for dental supplies, which consumed around three percent of the mercury. B-1

93 Table B-1 MERCURY CONSUMED IN THE UNITED STATES, 1%7 TO 1989 (In short tons and percent of total) Year Chlorine and Caustic Soda Manufacture Short tons % of total Pigments Short tons % of total Catalysts for Plastics Short tons % of total Catalysts, Misc. Short tons % of total Laboratory Uses Short tons % of total Pharmaceuticals Short tons % of total Paints, Antifouling Short tons % of total w w w w w w w w w w w C a a a a a a a a a a a a w w w w w w w w w c c w w w w w w C Source: Bureau of Mines, 1989 and earlier W-Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data: included in Other from 1969 through 1980; all other years included in Unknown. a- Included in Catalysts, Miscellanous b - Included in other Instruments and Related Products c - Included in other chemicals d- Included in Other e- Included in Electrical and Electronic Uses Note - Through 1979, Other total included mercury used for installation and expansion of chlorine and caustic soda plants

94 Table B-1 (continued) MERCURY CONSUMED IN THE UNITED STATES, 1967 TO 1989 Year Paints, Mildew-proofing Agricultural Chemicals Amalgamation Short tons % of total Short tons % of total Short tons % of total Pulp and Paper Manufacture Short tons % of total Other Chemicals Short tons % of total Electrical and Electronic Uses Short tons % of total , % w w w w w w w w w w w w w w , , Source: Bureau of Mines, 1989 and earlier W-Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data: included in other form 1969 through 1980; all other years included in Unknown. a-included in Catalysts, Miscellaneous b - Included in other Instruments and Related Prodcuts c Included in Other Chemicals d - Included in Other e- Included in Electrical and Electronic Uses Note - Through 1979, Other total included mercury used for installation and expansion of chlorine and caustic soda plants

95 Table B-1 (continued) MERCURY CONSUMED IN THE UNITED STATES, 1967 TO 1989 Year Electrical Lighting Short ton % of total Wiring Devices Measuring and Dental Equipment.. and Switches Batteries Other Electrical Uses Control Instruments and Supplies Short tons % of total Short tons % of total Short tons % of total Short tons % of total Short tons % of total e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e ,0575 1, , , e e e e e e e e e e e w w w w w 8.2 w w d b b b b b b b b b b b Source: Bureau of Mines, 1989 and earlier W-Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data included in Other from 1969 through 1980; all other years included in Unknown. a-included in Catalysts, Miscellaneous b - Included in other Instruments and Related Products C - Included in other chemicals d - Included in other e - Included in Electrical and Electronic Uses Note - Through 1979, other total included mercury used for installation and expansion of chlorine and caustic soda plants

96 Table B-1 (continued) MERCURY CONSUMED IN THE UNITED STATES, 1967 TO 1989 Year Other Instruments Short tons % of total other Short tons % of total Uknown Short tons % of total Total Short tons w w w w w w d , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,338.2 Source Bureau of Mines, 1989 and earlier W- Withheld to avoid disclosing company proprietary data: included in Other from 1969 through 1980; all other years included in Unknown a - Included in Catalysts, Miscellaneous b - Included in other Instruments and Related Products c - Included in other Chemicals d - Included in other e - Included in Electrical and Electronic Uses Note - Through 1979, other total included mercury used for installation and expansion of chlorine and caustic soda plants.

97 Appendix B REFERENCES 1. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines. Minerals Yearbook, Volume I, Metals and Minerals and earlier years. B-6

98 Appendix C BACKGROUND DATA ON MERCURY IN BATTERIES The tables in this appendix provide the data, sources, and calculations used in estimating the quantities of mercury discarded in municipal solid waste. These tables accompany the discussion and summary tables on mercury in batteries in Chapter 2 of the report. BATTERY TYPES Tables C-1 through C-5 provide basic information on the weights and mercury content of various types of batteries: zinc-air, carbon-zinc, heavy duty carbon zinc, alkaline, silver oxide, and mercury-zinc. These are the types of batteries that were identified as being discarded into municipal solid waste. CONSUMPTION OF HOUSEHOLD BATTERIES Tables C-6 through C-10 provide information on retail sales of household batteries containing mercury in the U.S. Domestic retail sales of these batteries are adjusted to account for mercury in imported batteries and in imported products containing batteries (such as watches and digital thermometers). The adjusted results are shown in Table C-10. WEIGHT OF MERCURY IN BATTERIES Finally, the adjusted data on retail sales of batteries and the data on weight of mercury in each type of battery were combined to yield estimates of total mercury discards in each type of battery (Tables C-II through C-16). C-1

99 Table C-1 ZINC-AIR BUTTON BATTERIES Year Average Weight Average % of Average Weight of Battery (g) Mercury in Battery of Mercury (g) % % % Table C-2 CARBON-ZINC BATTERIES General Purpose Size Year D C AA V Average Weight Average % of Average Weight of Battery (g) Mercury in Battery of Mercury(g) % % % % % % % % % % % % Heavy Duty Size Year D % % % C % % % AA % % % V % % % Source: Franklin Associates (1) and industry sources C-2

100 Table C-3 ALKALINE BATTERIES Year D Percent Hg Weight Hg (g) c Percent Hg Weight Hg (g) AA 9V Percent Hg Weight Hg (g) Percent Hg Weight Hg (g) Percent Hg Weight Hg (g) Button Percent Hg Weight Hg (g) 1%7 1% % 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.516% 0.367% 0.299% 0.299% 0.299% 0.232% 0.136% 0.021% 0.000% weight of Battery (g) % 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.466% 0.297% 0.259% 0.259% 0.259% 0.192% 0.117% 0.014% 0.000% % % 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.524% 0.434% 0.434% 0.434% 0.313% 0.298% 0.066% 0.000% % 0.461% 0.461% 0.461% 0.461% 0.461% 0.461% 0.461% 0.461% 0.461% % 0.461% 0.461% 0.461% % 0.461% 0.461% % 0.328% 0.328% 0.328% 0.244% 0.164% 0.048% 0.000% % 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% 0.362% % 0.003% 0.000% % 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.409% 0.205% 0.000% Source Franklin Associates (1) and industry sources. Results of teats done for this report (see Appendix -) are incorporated in the 1989 data.

101 Year Table C-4 SILVER OXIDE BUTTON BATTERIES Average Weight of Battery (g) Average % of Mercury in Battery % % % Average Weight of Mercury (g) Table C-5 MERCURY ZINC BATTERIES Average Weight Average % of Size Year of Battery (g) Mercury in Battery Button % % % Cylinder % % % Average Weight of Mercury (g) Source Franklin Associates (1) and industry sources C-4

102 Table C-6 RETAIL SALES OF DOMESTIC HOUSEHOLD BATTERIES IN THE UNITED STATES (In millions of units) Year Alkaline Carbon-zinc Heavy duty Mercury-zinc Silver Zinc air Total U.S. Retail Sales 1967 e 1968 e 1969 e 1970 e 1971 e 1972 e 1973 e 1974 e 1975 e 1976 e 1977 e 1978 e 1979 e 1980 e 1981 e 1982 e p , , , , , , o , , , , , , , , , , / / , , , , , , , , , , , , e 2, , e 3, ,008.0 Source National Electrical Manufacture Association (NEMA) e - Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate p - Projections from NEMA C-5

103 Table C-7 RETAIL SALES OF DOMESTIC HOUSEHOLD BATT ERIES IN THE UNITED STATES (In percent of total sales) Year Alkaline Carbon-zinc Heavy duty Mercury-zinc Silver Zinc air Total U.S. Retail Sales 1967 e 1968 e 1969 e 1970 e 1971 e 1972 e 1973 e 1974 e 1975 e 1976 e 1977 e 1978 e 1979 e 1980 e 1981 e 1982 e p 0.6% 0.8% 1.1% 1.9% 3.0% 4.8% 7.7% 11.3% 14.6% 18.5% 22.6% 27.3% 32.8% 37.6% 41.7% 45.4% 48.8% 54.5% 58.1% 59.6% 62.7% 64.8% 66.6% 54.1% 53.6% 53.1% 52.2% 51.1% 49.6% 47.7% 45.3% 43.1% 40.6% 38.0% 35.2% 32.1% 29.3% 26.9% 24.7% 22.7% 18.4% 16.4% 14.8% 13.3% 11.1% 10.2% 36.3% 36.4% 36.6% 36.4% 36.1% 35.5% 34.5% 33.3% 32.2% 31.0% 29.6% 28.0% 26.0% 24.4% 23.0% 21.8% 20.7% 19.7% 18.0% 18.4% 17.0% 17.0% 16.0% 8.4% 8.3% 8.2% 8.0 % 7.8% 7.6% 7.2% 6.8% 6.5% 6.1% 5.7% 5.3% 4.8% 4.4% 4.0% 3.7% 3.4% 3.0% 2.8% 2.5% 2.3% 2.0% 1.8% 0.7% 0.9% 1.1% 1.5% 1.8% 2.2% 2.5% 2.9% 3.2% 3.4% 3.6% 3,7% 3.8% 3.8% 3.8% 3.8% 3.7% 3.6% 3.6% 3.5% 3.3% 3.2% 3.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.7% 0.9% 1.0% 1.2% 1.5% 1.9% 2.2% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% l00.0% 100.0% 100.0% % 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 1994 e 73.8% 6.4% 13.5% 1.2% 2.7% 2.5% 100.0% 1999 e 78.8% 3.8% 11.5% 0.7% 2.4% 2.7% 100.0% Source National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) e - Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate p - Projections from NEMA C-6

104 Table C-8 TOTAL RETAIL SALES OF HOUSEHOLD BATTERIES (In units) Year 1967 e 1968 e 1969 e 1970 e 1971 e 1972 e 1973 e 1974 e 1975 e 1976 e 1977 e 1978 e 1979 e 1980 e 1981 e 1982 e p 1994 e 1999 e U.S. Retail Total U.S. Sales (1) Imports (2) Retail Sales 1,034,950, ,242,500 1,190,192/500 1,039,220, ,883,000 1,195,103,000 1,043,490, ,523,500 1,200,013,500 1,055,720, ,358,000 1,214,078,000 1,072,870, ,930,500 l,233,800,500 1,098,700, ,805,000 l,263,505,000 1,137,600, ,640, ,240,000 l,l85,300, ,795, ,095,000 1,233,000, ,950,000 1,417,950,000 1,291,100, ,665,000 1,484,765,000 1,359,900, ,985,000 l,563,885,000 1,445,000, ,750,000 1,661,750,000 1,559,100,00 233,865,000 1,792,965,000 1,669,400, ,410,000 1,919,810,000 1,779,700, ,955,000 2,046,655,000 1,890,000, ,500,000 2,173,500,000 1,997,000, ,350,000 2,296/550,000 2,112,000, ,800,000 2,428,800,000 2,178,000, ,700,000 2,504,700, ,000, ,550,000 2,664,550,000 2,442,000, ,300,000 2,808,300,000 2,567,000, ,050,000 2,952,050,000 2,694,000, ,100,000 3,098,100,000 3,353,000, ,950,000 3,855,950,000 4,008,000, ,200,000 4,609,200,000 (1) From Table C-6. (2) Assumed to be 15 percent of U.S. retail sales. e - Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate. p - Projections from National Electrical Manufacturers Association C-7

105 Table C-9 SALES OF HOUSEHOLD BATTERIES TO MANUFACTURERS (millions of units) Year e 1990 e 1991 e 1992 e 1993 e 1994 e 1995 e 1996 e 1997 e 1998 e 1999 e 2000 e Imports of Watches (1) Total Watch sales(2) Sales of Digital Thermometers (3) Total Batteries Contained in Products Alkaline Batteries (50% of total) Silver Batteries (50% of total) (1) American Watch Association (2). (2) Imports of watches divided by 95%. (3) Industrial source. Current Industrial Reports e - Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate C-8

106 Table C-10 Year Total U.S. Retail Sales TOTAL RETAIL SALES OF HOUSEHOLD BATTERIES BY TYPE (In Units) Alkaline Carbon-zinc Heavy duty Mercury-zinc Silver zinc air 1967 e 1968 e 1969 e 1970 e 1971 e 1972 e 1973 e 1974 e 1975 e 1976 e 1977 e 1978 e 1979 e 1980 e 1981 e 1982 e p 1,190,192,500 1,195,103,000 1,200,013,500 1,214,078,000 1,233,800, ,505,000 1,308,240,000 1,363,095,000 1,417,950,000 l,484,765,000 l,56,3885,000 1,661,750,000 1,792,965,000 1,919,310,000 2,046,655,000 2,173,500,000 2,296,550,000 2,428,800,000 2,504,700,000 2,664,550,000 2,808,300,000 2,952,050,000 3,098,100,000 7,360,000 10,028,000 12,696,000 23,368,000 36,708,000 60,720, ,740, ,100, ,460, ,160, ,200, ,250, ,650, ,050, ,450, ,850,000 1,121,250,000 1,322,500,000 1,455,900,000 1,588,150,000 1,759500,000 1,912,450,000 2,064,250, ,310, ,090, ,870, ,650, ,430, ,210, ,990, ,550, ,110, ,060, ,010, ,350, ,690, ,810, ,930, ,050, ,950, ,200, ,700, ,600, ,600, ,750, ,400, ,710, ,160, ,610, ,060, ,510, ,960, ,720, ,480, ,240, ,000, ,300, ,600, ,900, ,200, ,500, ,800, ,100, ,400, ,950, ,900, ,250, ,550, ,650,000 99,762,300 98,900,000 98,038,000 97,175,000 96,313,000 95,450,000 94,300,000 93,150,000 92,000,000 90,850,000 89,125,000 87,400,000 85,675,000 83,954,000 81,650,000 79,350,000 77,050,000 73,600,000 70,150,000 67,850,000 64,400,000 59,800,000 56,350,000 8,050,000 l0,925,000 13,800,000 17,825,000 21,850,000 27,600,000 33,350,000 39,100,000 44,850,000 50,600, ,000 62,100/000 67,850/000 72,450,000 77,050,000 81,650,000 85,100,000 87,400,000 89,700,000 92,000,000 92,000,000 93,150,000 95,450,000 o ,990,000 3,565,000 4,140,000 4,715,000 5,000,000 6,095,000 6,900,000 8,050,000 9,200,000 l,350,000 12,075,000 13,800,000 16,100,000 20,700,000 25,300,000 31,050,000 42,552,000 56,350,000 69,000, e 3,855,950,000 2,845,100, ,100, ,650,000 44,850, ,500,000 97,750, e 4,609,200,000 3,632,850, ,100, ,150,000 33,350, ,250, ,500,000 Retail sales of batteries adjusted for imports (Table C-8) reallocated based on percent of total sales (Table C-7). e- Franklin Associates, Ltd. -estimate - p- Projections from National Electrical Manufacturers Association C-9

107 Year 1967 e 1968 e 1969 e 1970 e 1971 e 1972 e 1973 e 1974 e 1975 e 1976 e 1977 e 1978 e 1979 e 1980 e 1981 e 1982 e p Total Alkaline Battery Sales (1) (Units) 7,360,000 10,028,000 12,696,000 23,368,000 36,708,000 60,720, ,740, ,100, ,464, ,160, ,200, ,250, ,650, ,050, ,450, ,850,000 1,121,250,000 1,322,500,000 1,455,900,000 l,588,150,000 1,759,500,000 1,912,450,000 2,064250,000 Table C-11 WEIGHT OF MERCURY IN ALKALINE BATTERIES, 1967 TO 1999 D % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) 33.38% 32.55% 31.72% 30.89% 30.06% 29.23% 28.40% 27.57% 26.74% 25.91% 25.08% 24.25% 23.42% 22.49% 21.66% 20.83% 20.00% 18.77% 18.70% 17.28% 14.54% 13.73% 12.71% 1,798, ,997 2,948,711 5, ,079,450 12,995,490 20,948,474 31,107,958 40,618,873 52,012,006 65,044,142 80,656/389 l00,771, ,737, ,511, ,664, ,196, ,757, ,627, ,475/ ,580, ,444,704 86,391,659 c AA % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) 26.19% 25.88% 25.57% 25.26% 24.95% 24.64% 24.33% 24.02% % 23.40% 23.09% 22.78% 22.47% 22.06% 21.75% 21.44% 21.13% 18.77% 17.44% 17.35% 17.02% 16.50% 16.11% 605, ,809 1,020,487 1,855,517 2,878,997 4,703,081 7,704,670 11,635,516 15,462,356 20,166,473 25,708,841 32,528,098 41,508,001 50,001,254 58,419,243 66,577,241 74,475,249 78,031,502 50,970,954 48,116,187 52,293,659 55,102,872 43,121, % 27.14% 28.25% 29.36% 30.47% 31.58% 32.69% 33.80% % 36.02% 37.13% 38.24% 39.35% 40.36% 41.47% 42.58% 43.69% 47.73% 49.74% 48.99% 53.63% 53.96% 55.28% 229, , , , ,019 2,300,749 3,951,320 6,249,491 8,689,795 11,848,766 15,779,703 20,841,940 27,745,260 34, ,515,375 50,468,685 58,777,326 75,737,758 86,888,571 77,236,670 93,674, ,444,021 81,883,332 % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) 0.89% 1.11% 1.33% 1.55% 1.77% 1.99% 2.21% 2.43% 2.65% 2.87% 3.09% 3.31 % 3.53% 3.65% 3.87% 4.09% 4.31 % 5.55% 5.90% 7.29% 6.31 % 7.30% 7.48% 3,501 5,949 9,025 19,359 34,726 64, , , , , , ,612 1,108,707 1,406,636 1,767,343 2,159,423 2,582,873 3,922,943 4,590,996 4,411,094 4,230,054 5,319,125 4,367, e 2,733,095, % 6,860, % 3,341, % 24,964, % 1,735, e 3,514,837, % % o 64.74% % 0 (1) From Table C-10. (2) Weight of mercury in batteries from Table C-3. An average of a one year lag from the production of the battery to the time of retail sale exists. Therefore, the weight of mercury used was obtained from the previous year. e-franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate p- Projection from National Electrical Manufacturer Association

108 9V Year % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) 1967 e 13.18% 1968 e 13.01% 1969 e 12.84% 1970 e 12.67% 1971 e 12.50% 1972 e 12.33% 1973 e 12.16% 1974 e 11.99% 1975 e 11.82% 1976 e 11.65% 1977 e 11.48% 1978 e 11.31% 1979 e 11.14% 1980 e 10.87% 1981 e 10.70% 1982 e 10.53% % % % % % % 1989 p 7.92% 1993 e 7.13% 1998 e 6.33% Table C-11 (continued) WEIGHT OF MERCURY IN ALKALINE BATTERIES, 1967 TO , , , , ,847 1,264,271 2,068,620 3,120,090 4,140,923 5,393,558 6,866,505 8,675,666 11,054,758 13,235,496 15,438,878 17,565,668 19,615,867 19,384,772 18,979,910 23,037,216 23,769,747 25,900,596 27,607, ,231 o Button Battery Sales to Manufacturer (units) (3) Weight Hg (g) (2) ,650, ,216 72,211, ,407 97,033, , , , ,860, ,976,316 1,008, ,231, , ,547,368 o Total Mercury in Alkaline Batteries (g) 2,801,964 3,758,617 4,683,844 8,483,364 13,110,039 21,328,173 34,792,076 52,313,195 69,205,792 89,841, ,984, ,505, ,188, ,298, ,652, ,436, ,648, ,549, ,326, ,317, ,448, ,454, ,240,446 37,726,086 0 (1) From Table C-10. (2) Weight of mercury in batteries from Table C-3. An average of a one year lag from the production of the battery to the time of retail sale exists. Therefore, the weight of mercury used was obtained from the previous year. (3) From Table C-9. e - Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate p - Projections from National Electrical Manufacturers Association

109 Year 1967 e 1968 e 1969 e 1970 e 1971 e 1972 e 1973 e 1974 e 1975 e 1976 e 1977 e 1978 e 1979 e 1980 e 1981 e 1982 e p 1994 e 1999 e Total Carbon-Zinc Battery Sales(l) (Units) 643,310, ,090, ,870, ,650, ,430, ,210, ,990, ,550, ,110, ,060, ,010, ,350, ,690, ,810, ,930, ,150, ,950, ,0, ,700, ,600, ,600, ,750, ,441, ,100, ,100,000 D % of Sake Weight Hg (g) (2) 61.23% 60.08% 58.93% 57.78% 56.63% 55.48% 54.33% 53.18% 52.03% 50.88% 49.73% 48.58% 47.43% 46.28% 45.13% 43.98% 42.83% 38.40% 37.43% 34.59% 37.35% 37.19% 33.69% 26.97% 20.17% 2,757,291 2,691,963 2,627,152 2,562,861 2,499,088 2,435,833 2,373,096 2,298,892 2,225,724 2,147,858 2,071,289 1, ,911,348 1,823,279 l,737,284 1,653,362 1,561,860 1,199,386 1,078, , , , , ,306 Table C-22 WEIGHT OF MERCURY IN CARBON-ZINC BATTERIES, 1967 To c % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) 31.84% 31.23% 30.62% 30.01% 29.40% 28.79% 28.18% 27.57% 26.%% 26.35% 25.74% 25.13% 24.52% 23.91% 23.30% 22.69% 22.08% 26.55% 27.65% 23.84% 23.77% 24.21% 22.22% 18.98% 16.28% 614, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,579 70,065 o AA % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) 1.16% 2.55% 3.94% 5.33% 6.72% 8.11% 9.50% 10.89% 12.28% 13.67% 15.06% 16.45% 17.84% 19.23% 20.62% 22.01% 23.40% 26.55% 24.30% 31.69% 28.70% 27.37% 32.97% 41.66% 50.06% 5,970 13,058 20,074 27,019 3$892 40,693 47,423 53,801 65,951 71,687 77,032 82,162 86,583 90,716 94,564 97,522 94,773 80, ,293 85,549 71,764 83,717 41,010 o 9V % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) 5.78% 98, % 104, % 110, % 115, % 121, % 126, % % 136, % 141, % 145, % 149, % 152, % 155, % 157,944 l0.96%% 159, % 161, % 161, % 100, % 115, % 103, % 100, % 97, % 93, % 40, % o Total Mercury Consumed in Carbon-Zinc Batteries (Grad 3,476,286 3,409, ,276,050 3,210,307 3,145,066 3,080,227 3,000,444 2,921,564 2,836,116 2,751,921 2,661,660 2,572,903 2,471,510 2,372,123 2,274,742 2,165,980 1,750,182 1,615,990 1,444,668 1,426,028 l,260,577 1,137, ,935 0 (1) From Table C-10. (2) Weight of mercury in batteries from Table C-2. An average of a one year fag from the production of the battery to the time of retail sale exists. Therefore, the weight of mercury used was obtained from the previous year. e -Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate p- Projections from National Electrical Manufacturer Association

110 Year 1967 e 1968 e 1969 e 1970 e 1971 e 1972 e 1973 e 1974 e 1975 e 1976 e 1977 e 1978 e 1979 e 1980 e 1981 e 1982 e p 1994 e 1999 e Table C-13 WEIGHT OF MURCURY IN HEAVY DUTY BATTERIES, 1967 TO 1999 Total Heavy Duty Battery Sales (1) D c AA % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) 431,710, ,160, ,610, ,060, ,510, ,960, ,720, ,480, ,240, ,000, ,300, ,600, ,900, ,200, ,500, ,800, ,100, ,400, ,950, ,900, ,250, ,550, ,650, ,000, ,150, % 45.74% 44.80% 43.86% 42.92% 41.98% 41.04% 40.10% 39.16% 38.22% 37.28% 36.34% 35.40% 34.46% 33.52% 32.58% 31.64% 31.01% 27.23% 26.06% 26.02% 22.65% 23.90% 19.82% 16.57% 350, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,00l 268, , , , , , , ,121 89, % 23.96% 24.15% 24.34% 24.53% 24.72% 24.91% 25.10% 25.29% 25.48% 25.67% 25.86% 26.05% 26.24% 26.43% 26.62% 26.81% 21.87% 23.16% 22.53% 22.89% 22.65% 23.43% 24.50% 25.65% 307, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , % 18.89% 19.74% 20.59% 21.44% 22.29% 23.14% 23.99% 24.84% 25.69% 26.54% 27.39% 28.24% 29.09% 29.94% 30.79% 31.64% 37.25% 39.44% 42.02% 41.93% 45.31% 43.16% 46.62% 49.12% 62,304 65,761 69,265 72,816 76,414 80,059 83,622 87,224 90,863 94,539 98, , , , , , , , , , , , ,138 96,718 0 Total Mercury Consumed in 9V Heavy Duty Batteries (3) % of Sales Weight Hg (g) (2) (Grams) 11.50% 11.40% 11.30% 11.20% 11.10% 11.00% 10.90% 10.80% 10.70% 10.60% 10.50% 10.40% 10.30% 10.20% 10.10% 10.00% 9.90% 9.86% 10.18% 9.39% 9.16% 9.38% 9.51% 9.03% 8.58% 131, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,911 62, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,234 8%3, , , , , , ,044 0 (1) From Table C-10. (2) Weights of mercury in betteries from Table C-2. An average of a one year lag from the production of the battery to the time of retail sale exists Therefore, the weight of mercury Used Was obtained from the previous year. e- Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate p - Projection from National Electrical Manufacturers Association

111 Table C-14 WEIGHT OF MERCURY IN MERCURY-ZINC BATTERIES Year Mercury-Zinc Battery Retail Sales (1) (Units) Sales to Hospitals (2) (Units) Total Sales of Mercury- Zinc Batteries (Units) Total Mercury in Mercury-Zinc Batteries (3) (Grams) 1967 e 1968 e 1969 e 1970 e 1971 e 1972 e 1973 e 1974 e 1975 e 1976 e 1977 e 1978 e 1979 e 1980 e 1981 e 1982 e p 99,762,000 98,900,000 98,038,000 97,175,000 96,313,000 95,450,000 94,300,000 93,150,000 92,000,000 90,850,000 89,125,000 87,400,000 85,675,000 83,950,000 81,650,000 79,350,000 77,050,000 73,600,000 70,150,000 67,850,000 64,400,000 59,800,000 56,350,000 14,964,300 14,835,000 14,705,700 14,576,250 14,446,950 14,317,500 14,145,000 13,972,500 13,800,000 13,627,500 13,368,750 13,110,000 12,851,250 12,592,500 12,247,500 11,902,500 11,557,500 11,040,000 10,522,500 l0,177,500 9,660,000 8,970,000 8,452, ,726, ,735, ,743, ,751, ,759, ,767, ,445, ,122, ,800, ,477, ,493, ,510,000 98,526,250 96,542,500 93,897,500 91,252,500 88,607,500 84,640,000 80,672,500 78,027,500 74,060,000 68,770,000 64,802, ,227, ,841, ,454, ,064, ,677, ,288, ,104, ,920, ,735, ,551, ,775, ,999, ,222, ,446, ,078, ,709, ,341, ,788, ,236, ,867, , ,578, ,025, e 43,084,000 6,462,600 49,546, ,293, e 32,267,000 4,840,050 37,107,050 89,343,064 (1) From Table C-10. (2) Assumed to be 15% of mercury zinc retail sales. (3) Weight of mercury in batteries from Table C-5. An average of a one year lag from the production of the battery to the time of retail sale exists. Therefore, the weight of mercury used was obtained from the previous year. e - Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate p - Projections from National Electrical Manufacturers Association C-14

112 Table C-15 WEIGHT OF MERCURY IN SILVER BATTERIES Year 1967 e 1968 e 1969 e 1970 e 1971 e 1972 e 1973 e 1974 e 1975 e 1976 e 1977 e 1978 e 1979 e 1980 e 1981 e 1982 e p Silver Battery Retail Sales (1) (Units) 8,050,000 10,925,000 13,800,000 17,825,000 21,850,000 27,600,000 33,350,000 39,100,000 44,850,000 50,600,000 56,350,000 62,100,000 67,850,000 72,450,000 77,050,000 81,650,000 85,100,000 87,400,000 89,700,000 92,000,000 92,000,000 93,150,000 95,450,000 Silver Battery Sales to Manufacturers (2) (Units) 83,650,947 72,211,342 97,033, ,304,079 l09,860, ,976,316 Total Sales of Silver Batteries (Units) 8,050,000 10,925,000 13,800,000 17,825,000 21,850,000 27,600,000 33,350,000 39,100,000 44,850,000 50,600,000 56,350,000 62,100,000 67,850,000 72,450,000 77,050,000 81,650,000 85,100, ,050, ,911, ,033, ,304, ,010, ,426,316 Total Mercury in Silver Batteries (3) (Grams) 39,284 53,314 67,344 86, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,690 1, e 103,500, ,231, ,731, , e 109,250, ,547, ,797,368 0 (1) From Table C-10. (2) From Table C-9. (3) Weight of mercury in batteries from Table C-4. An average of a one year lag from the production of the battery to the time of retail sale exists. Therefore, the weight of mercury used was obtained from the previous year. e - Franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate p - Projections from National Electrical Manufacturers Association C-15

113 Table C-16 WEIGHT OF MERCURY IN ZINC AIR BATTERIES Year Total Discards of Zinc Air Batteries (1) (Units) 1967 e e e e e 2,990, e 3,565, e 4,140, e 4,715, e 5,290, e 6,095, e 6,900, e 8,050, e 9,200, e 10,350, e 12,075, e 13,800, ,100, ,700, ,300, ,050, ,552, , p 69,000, e 97,750, e 126,500,000 Total Mercury in Zinc Air Batteries (2) (Grams) , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,966 1,186,731 1,626,337 2,153,697 2,637, ,490 0 (1) From Table C-10. (2) Weight of mercury in batteries from Table C-1. An average of a one year lag from the production of the battery to the time of retail sale exists. Therefore, the weight of mercury used was obtained from the previous year. e-franklin Associates, Ltd. estimate p- Projections from National Electrical Manufacturers Association C-16

114 Appendix C REFERENCES 1. Franklin Associates, Ltd. Characterization of Products Containing Lead and Cadmium in Municipal Solid Waste in the United States, , Working Papers. October 17, Conversation with representative of an industrial firm. July 23, C-17

115 Appendix D HOUSEHOLD BATTERIES THAT DO NOT CONTAIN MERCURY Two kind of batteries that are commonly found in householdsnickel-cadmium and lithium--do not contain mercury. These batteries are briefly described below. NICKEL-CADMIUM BATTERIES The nickel-cadmium battery is the most widely used rechargeable battery in households and demand in the consumer market is increasing. The majority (80 percent) of nickel-cadmium batteries made are used inside rechargeable appliances, such as hand drills and portable vacuums. Available in cylinder and button sizes, the nickel-cadmium battery is ideally suited to high-rate applications, such as lap-top computers (l). The nickel-cadmium battery is also replacing the mercury zinc battery in hearing aids and pocket calculators (2). This battery contributes no mercury to municipal solid waste, but it does supply a significant amount of cadmium. LITHIUM BATTERIES The lithium battery is most commonly available in button size. Its consumer market demand is increasing as more applications for button batteries are created and as its use as a replacement for mercury-zinc cells rises (3). The lithium battery contains no mercury. Cylinder sizes are becoming available as the lithium battery substitutes for alkaline batteries. Cost is a factor since the price of lithium batteries is two to three times higher than alkaline batteries (4). D-1

116 Appendix D REFERENCES 1. Arthur D. Little, Inc. Marketing Development Strategies for Recyclable Materials. July Crompton, T. R. Small Batteries, Primary Cells, Vol. 2. John Wiley and Sons, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Environment Committee. Fate of Small Quantities of Hazardous Waste. August Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Household Batteries in Minnesota: Interim Report of the Household Battery Recycling and Disposal Study. March D-2

117 Appendix E WORLDWIDE ANNUAL ANTHROPOGENIC SOURCES OF MERCURY This appendix presents a summary of worldwide annual anthropogenic (resulting from human activity) sources of mercury. The data source for the summary (Table E-1) is an article in the peer-reviewed journal Nature (1). Data are presented for atmospheric emissions, inputs into aquatic ecosystems, and emissions into soils. The authors of the Nature article estimated that total annual anthropogenic releases of mercury into the biosphere are approximately 12,000 short tons. This was computed by adding the median values of the terrestrial and aquatic inputs minus atmospheric emissions. E-1

118 Table E-1 WORLDWIDE ANNUAL ANTHROPOGENIC SOURCES OF MERCURY (In thousand kilograms per year and short tons per year) Mercury source Anthropogheric emissions Coal combustion-electric utilities Coal combustion-industry/domestic Lead production Copper-nickel production Municipal refuse incineration Sewage sludge incineration Wood combustion Total emissions Median value Inputs Into aquatic ecosystems (2) Domestic wastewater-central Domestic wastewater-non-central Steam electric Base metal mining/dressing Smelting/refining-nonferrous metals Manufacturing processes-metals Manufacturing processes-chemicals Manufacturing processes-petroleum products Atmospheric fallout Dumping of sewage sludge Total input, water Median value Thousand kg/year , , ,200 3, , , , ,800 4,600 Short tons/yr (1) , , ,003-6,834 3, , , , ,667 5,070 Emissions Into soils (2) Agricultural and food wastes Animal wastes, manure Logging/other wood wastes Urban refuse Municipal sewage sludge Solid wastes-metal manufacturing Coal fly ash and bottom fly ash Peat (agricultural and fuel uses) Wastage of commercial products Atmospheric fallout Total input soils Median value Mine tailings Smelter slags and wastes Total discharge on land 0-1, , , , ,000 8, , ,000 Mercury into biosphere = approximately 12,000 short tons per year (3). 0-1, , , ,740 1,720-16,512 9, , ,425-19,841 (1) Conversion from metric units to short tons by Franklin Associates, Ltd. (2) Units in data source given in million kg/year._ Converted to thousand kg/year by Franklin Associates, (3) Man-induced mobilization of trace metals into the biosphere equals median values of the terrestrial plus aquatic input minus atmospheric emissions (Reference 1). Source: Nriagu and Pacyna (l). E-2

119 Appendix E REFERENCES 1. Nriagu, J. O., and Pacyna, J.M. Quantitative Assessment of Worldwide Contamination of Air, Water and Soils by Trace Metals. Nature. Vol. 333, May E-3

120 MIDWEST RESEARCH lnstitute Volker Bouleva Kansas City, Missouri 641 Telephone (816) November 1, 1990 Ms. Keri Hoffsonner Franklin and Associates 4121 W 83rd, Suite 108 Prairie Village, Kansas Subject EPA Contract No. 68-W9-0040, Task 06, Mercury Assessment in Alkaline Dry Batteries. Dear Ms. Hoffsonner: 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY This report presents the results on measurement of household batteries for mercury content This work effort is described under Task 06 in the Work Plan Revision No. 1 of EPA Contract No. 68-W9-0040, Work Assignment No. H In this study, MRI prepared and analyzed five different battery cell sizes from two different brands, Duracell Brand and Eveready Brand for mercury content in the soft material It is assumed that the soft material is the only source of mercury in these batteries. These batteries, supplied to MRI by Franklin and Associates, were received in the original commercial packages. Each brand studied included five different cell sizes: AAA, AA, C, D and 9V. This sample range represents approximately 90 percent of household alkaline battery sales in the U.S. One sub-sample was prepared and analyzed for each of the ten batteries. The individual sample results were calculated for each battery and are represented in Table 1 as mercury weight percentage of the total battery weight MRI developed a detailed procedure for quantitative extraction of the soft material from the discharged batteries to perform this analysis effort MRI adapted the EPA SW-846 Mercury Method 7471 to be applicable for analysis of the batteries soft material. 2.0 EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH The procedures used for this mercury assessment study in battery soft material including cutting open the batteries, extraction of the soft material, dissolution of the soft material and analysis of mercury in sample digestate, are described below. The analytical method used in this study was the USEPA SW-846 Method 7471 Mercury in Solid or Semisolid Waste (Manual Cold-vapor Technique) instead of Method 7470 proposed in the Revised Work Plan of September 14,1990. The Method 7470 Mercury in Liquid Waste (Manual Cold-Vapor Technique) does not apply in the case of solid materials.