Advanced Search
Waste comes in many different forms, has many different impacts, and is a product of virtually every step of every process. In 2018, consumers in the United States produced about 4.9 pounds of municipal solid waste per person per day—an increase of 34% between 1980 and 2018. Total waste generation has increased by 93% over that same period due to population increase. This waste has to go somewhere: put in a landfill, burned in an incinerator, recycled, or reused. But waste does not only come from individual consumers or biological processes, it also comes from industrial processes like constructing and demolishing buildings and manufacturing products. When waste is not handled properly, it ends up damaging ecosystems, contaminating waterways, and emitting greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change.
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
According to the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) waste management hierarchy, the best way to decrease waste is to reduce consumption, including by reusing products and materials. The next-best waste-reduction strategy is to recycle materials left over after use. Only if reusing and recycling are not possible is it advisable to dispose of a product by throwing it away.
However, individuals often have no choice but to throw things away because many products are designed for single or short-term use and cannot easily be reused or recycled. Because companies currently have no legal responsibility for end-of-life management of their products, consumers and municipalities bear the burden of dealing with used goods. While EPA's waste management hierarchy represents a desirable model, it does not adequately reflect the current waste management system in the United States.
Federal waste regulations fall under the jurisdiction of the EPA. In 1976, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) (P.L. 94-580) established a process for managing hazardous and non-hazardous waste. Regarding non-hazardous solid waste, the law defers to states to lead waste planning and monitoring. The EPA works together with states to closely monitor different types of hazardous waste, which includes leftover cleaning products, batteries, paints, used oil, and pharmaceuticals.
Clickable Table of Contents:
Read More: Buildings and Infrastructure | Environmental Justice | Industry and Manufacturing | Public Health
Nearly half of all municipal solid non-hazardous waste—rubbish that is generated in homes and businesses—ends up in the over 1,250 active landfills around the country. There are also landfills for industrial waste, construction and demolition debris, coal combustion residuals, hazardous waste, and polychlorinated biphenyl.
Landfills are areas of land engineered to hold waste. The purpose of landfills is to minimize contact between waste and the surrounding environment, especially water. Landfills consist of three main components: a bottom liner, to ensure the waste does not leach into the local water system; a “leachate collection system” that collects degrading and decomposing waste as well as the toxic wastewater created by the rain that runs through the pile; and a daily or interim cover, which reduces odors and rain infiltration while also discouraging birds, insects, and rodents (all potential disease vectors). A permanent waterproof cover is placed once a landfill reaches capacity and is closed.
When waste arrives at landfills in the United States, dump trucks and other heavy equipment put it on top of the bottom liner or the compacted garbage already present. Workers then pack the new waste down and layer it with other materials until the landfill is full, as determined by the permit issued by the state environmental agency or the state solid waste regulatory authority. The lifespan of a landfill depends on its size and the amount of waste collected in the municipalities it serves. Landfills are typically operational for 15 to 40 years before they are capped, but the lifespan is determined solely by the amount of waste collected rather than elapsed time.
Despite the daily covers used to reduce the amount of water entering landfills, water inevitably gets into the waste and sinks to the bottom, collecting hazardous chemicals from everything in the landfill along the way. This contaminated water is called leachate. A leachate management system is designed to remove the liquid from the landfill and treat it. However, the bottom liner can still rip and allow leachate to leak into underground aquifers, which can contaminate drinking water and harm local communities and ecosystems.
Organic material, like food, breaking down in landfills produces landfill gas, which is primarily methane and carbon dioxide. In 2022, landfills were the third largest source of methane emissions in the United States, accounting for 14% of the total. These emissions can be measured by satellites, helping to pinpoint areas of greatest concern. The primary way to reduce methane emissions from landfills is to divert organic waste from ever entering the system (see the Food Waste section below). Gas collection systems can also recover landfill methane emissions to generate energy, and landfills can be covered to minimize fugitive emissions.
In addition to active landfills, there are more than 10,000 capped landfills in the United States. According to the EPA, which regulates landfill design and capping standards, capping the landfill means covering the waste with protection equivalent to “an infiltration layer of at least 18 inches of earthen material covered by an erosion layer of at least 6 inches of earthen material that is capable of sustaining native plant growth.” Once capped, landfills can be transformed into parks, solar arrays, and other uses to benefit the public.
Instead of storing waste in landfills, it can be disposed of through incineration. This solution is sometimes preferred in densely populated communities with limited space. As it burns, the waste can be used to generate electricity in waste-to-energy systems.
Incineration involves placing waste in a primary combustion chamber, where it is heated to high temperatures for a set duration of time. Gases and other contaminants that are not destroyed pass into a secondary chamber for additional burning. The remaining gases then move through air pollution control systems to capture particulates and neutralize harmful compounds, such as lead and chromium. Fly ash, the byproduct of the incineration process, must be disposed of in a hazardous waste landfill because it contains concentrated heavy metals and other toxins.
There are 72 municipal waste incinerators across the United States, processing approximately 12% of municipal solid waste. Five states—Florida, New York, Minnesota, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania—account for a combined total of 41 incinerators. In addition to municipal waste incinerators, there are also facilities designed to burn commercial and industrial solid waste; hospital, medical, and infectious waste; sewage sludge; and hazardous materials. The EPA has separate regulatory guidelines for each type, which are distinct from municipal waste incinerators.
Incinerators emit 0.7–1.2 metric tons of carbon dioxide per metric ton of municipal waste burned. They also release methane, nitrogen oxides, and ammonia in addition to toxic materials like heavy metals, dioxins, and furans. The EPA sets standards limiting the acceptable level of each pollutant, which vary by type of incinerator. However, incinerators still pollute their surroundings, and because 85% of incinerators are located in environmental justice communities, low-income neighborhoods and communities of color face disproportionate exposure to these pollutants and their associated health risks.
Recycling is the process of returning used materials to a “raw” state so they can be manufactured into another product. Because the United States lacks a national recycling standards law, each municipality accepts different materials depending on its local material recovery facility’s capabilities. This system can be confusing and inconvenient for consumers to navigate, making recycling more complicated and less effective.
Each material type is processed differently. In general, discarded products and materials are usually sorted, cleaned, and ground up or melted before the base material is reused. Most residential waste that is put into recycling bins is not accepted and is redirected to a landfill or incinerator from the material recovery facility. In the United States, only 43% of households participate in recycling programs and only 21% of materials that could be recycled actually are recycled. The types of materials with the highest recycling success rates are paper (68%), metal (37%), and rubber (25%).
As of 2018, plastic made up 12.2% of all the municipal solid waste in the United States. Plastic waste generation per person has gone up 263% since 1980. And yet, only 5–6% of plastics are recycled across the country. Low plastic recycling rates result from too many unmixable plastic types, insufficient infrastructure at recycling facilities, and the lack of national recycling standards.
Although glass is infinitely recyclable, only 31% of glass containers are recycled in the United States. Single-stream recycling processes make collecting glass difficult because it often breaks during the collection process, contaminating other materials. By contrast, European countries with multi-stream processes recycle glass at an average rate of 81%, with some exceeding 90%.
There is a clear trade-off between single-stream and multi-stream recycling processes. Being able to throw everything in the same bin (the single-stream way) makes it easier for consumers, but more complicated for recycling facilities. They are much more likely to end up with cross contamination (plastics mixed in with paper, for example, or metals with plastics). Recycling facilities sell bales of waste materials to processors and manufacturers, which then do the actual work of converting the waste back into usable raw materials. Contamination makes it more difficult for recycling facilities to find buyers for their bales, and to get good prices for them. Inversely, multi-stream recycling lowers participation rates (people cannot be bothered to sort their recyclables) but leads to higher-quality bales.
In 2024, an estimated 70.7 million tons of food was wasted in the United States, representing 29% of all domestic food production and a loss of $380 billion. Food waste, or “surplus food,” can occur at all steps of the food supply chain: when growing the food in farms and ranches, processing it in facilities, distributing it in grocery stores, and both preparing and consuming it (or rather, not consuming it) in restaurants, businesses, schools, universities, and homes. Approximately one-third of U.S. food waste comes from households that throw away leftovers or food past its expiration date. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization estimates food waste costs the world around $2.6 trillion annually, including environmental and social costs.
If not properly disposed of, surplus food produces potent greenhouse gases like methane and carbon dioxide when it decomposes in landfills or is burned in incinerators. In 2024, methane emissions from U.S. food waste was equivalent to 219 million tons of carbon dioxide, similar to emissions from 51 million gasoline-fueled cars driven for a year.
Plastic is created from propylene and ethylene, which are chemicals derived from fossil fuels extracted from the earth by fracking, mining, or drilling. Companies combine chemical additives with propylene and ethylene to create “nurdles,” which are used as a raw material to produce plastic products through molding and other processes. Nurdles are a microplastic (pieces smaller than 5mm) that can contaminate the environment by seeping out of plastic manufacturing facilities or falling out of containers during transport.
While in almost universal use, plastics—from their production to their disposal—are harmful to the environment. The plastic production process creates an estimated 5.3% of global greenhouse gas emissions. It takes up to a quarter-liter of oil to produce, transport, and dispose of a one-liter plastic water bottle. Creating plastics is also noxious to the local environment because it pollutes the air surrounding refineries. Plastic production, which has increased from 2 million tons in 1950 to 475 million tons in 2022, is expected to reach 1,200 million tons by 2060.
After a plastic product is used, its most likely destination is a landfill or an incineration facility. In a landfill, it degrades into microplastics. Both microplastics and related chemicals can contaminate the local environment if the landfill’s leachate collection system or bottom liner fails. In an incinerator, plastic is burned, creating toxic airborne pollution. Waste plastics and microplastics can pollute the environment via litter, wastewater, nurdles, and outdoor plastic degradation. Airborne microplastics can contaminate soil and water sources through precipitation.
For more information on reusable building materials, check out EESI’s briefing, Building Materials: From Production to Reuse.
Waste from building materials accounts for approximately 23% of the total U.S. waste stream. Constructing and deconstructing buildings generates waste from concrete, wood, asphalt, gypsum, metals, bricks, glass, plastics, and many other materials. Building demolition accounts for 90% of construction and deconstruction waste.
The production of materials like cement and bricks is resource-intensive and contributes significantly to climate change. Cement-related emissions—from calcination (the chemical reaction triggered by heating limestone) to burning fossil fuels to heat the kilns—represent an estimated 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Brick production generates around 1% of global emissions, and that number is expected to increase to 3.5–5% by 2050.
Through better practices and systems, many of these materials could be recovered. Currently, it is estimated that one-third of all materials in deconstruction and demolition are suitable for reuse. However, if these materials were designed to maintain structural integrity throughout disassembly, that number could be much higher. Better state and local policies could also help reduce construction and deconstruction waste. For example, Portland, Oregon, requires old residential buildings to be deconstructed rather than demolished. As a result, the city has reused more than 2,000 tons of wood since 2018.
For more information on water reuse, check out EESI’s article, "How Water Reuse Can Address Scarcity."
Wastewater treatment plants across the United States process roughly 34 billion gallons of influent every day. These facilities ensure safe water quality by removing solids, contaminants, and excess nutrients, before releasing the treated water into America’s waterways. Treatment typically occurs in three stages. Stage one removes large solids and grit. Stage two uses microorganisms to digest organic matter, which results in biological mass that is then removed from the water as it settles to the bottom. Lastly, advanced treatment, which is used in an increasing number of plants, extracts nutrients and persistent contaminants through filtration, membrane systems, or chemical processing.
Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), often referred to as “forever chemicals,” are a growing concern for public health because advanced wastewater treatment processes remove less than one-quarter of them. PFAS pollution primarily enters waterways through industry runoff, consumer products, and firefighting foam. The Waterkeeper Alliance and Hispanic Access Foundation found that 95% of samples taken downstream from wastewater treatment plants had elevated levels of PFAS. Retroactively addressing PFAS contamination is expensive. While PFAS can be purchased for anywhere from $50-$1,000 per pound, they cost between $2.7 million to $18 million per pound to remove from wastewater and destroy.
Wastewater treatment accounts for 3% of total U.S. methane emissions and 6.1% of nitrous oxide emissions. Through advanced processes such as anaerobic digestion and combined heat and power systems, methane and nitrogen collected from waste can be used to power waste treatment plants. The byproducts of wastewater management can also be used to heat homes, create fertilizer, create biogas, or replace eroded soil.
Aging infrastructure compounds the challenges of treating wastewater and using its byproducts. The U.S. wastewater system received a D+ from the 2025 American Society of Civil Engineers Infrastructure Report Card, with a funding gap of approximately $70 billion for identified needs. A 2022 EPA survey found that, over the next 20 years, the investments needed to protect U.S. waterways will need to total at least $630 billion in clean water infrastructure upgrades. Federal programs from the EPA, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (such as the Environmental Infrastructure Program) provide some funding and technical assistance, but large-scale upgrades will be necessary to maintain reliability and meet water quality standards.
The United States manages hazardous waste through a combination of federal laws and cleanup programs designed to address ongoing generation and existing contamination. RCRA established EPA’s authority to regulate hazardous waste from “cradle to grave.” In response to disasters like the Love Canal (a chemical waste dump that sickened nearby residents), Congress passed the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) (P.L. 96-510), also known as Superfund. CERCLA created a tax in order to fund hazardous waste site cleanups and initiated the National Priorities List of contaminated sites that need to be cleaned. There are over 1,300 active Superfund sites today. Additionally, the EPA’s Brownfields Program and Land Revitalization Program work with communities to remediate contaminated brownfields, which are estimated to number between 450,000 to 1 million. These programs aim to address legacy pollution and persistent contaminants, including heavy metals, polychlorinated biphenyls, and pesticides, which disproportionately impact historically-disadvantaged communities.
At the most basic level, waste needs to be reduced. The current system of “take-make-waste,” also known as the linear economy or the single-use system, is not sustainable and causes prolonged harm for the sake of short-term profits and convenience. A circular economy, on the other hand, follows the principles laid out by the EPA’s waste hierarchy.
To take just one example, food waste can be reduced at all stages of the supply chain. Farms could produce less excess food, stores could donate food that is close to expiration instead of disposing of it, education about “best by” dates could be distributed more widely, and more grants could be established for businesses focused on food waste diversion. Organic material that is still wasted can be composted or turned into biogas to reduce its environmental impact.
Federal policies could catalyze waste reduction. The waste hierarchy outlines strategies centered on reducing consumption and encouraging reuse. Incentivizing companies to account for the waste and emissions created by the manufacturing, use, and end-of-life of their products would greatly reduce waste and its impact on the health of local ecosystems and communities. Making manufacturers responsible for the environmental impacts of their products after they have been used is commonly known as extended producer responsibility (EPR). Such measures could also bolster the reclamation and reuse of critical minerals, which are essential components of many clean energy and modern technologies.
Implementing national standards for composting food waste, reusing and recycling glass and plastics, and eliminating single-use plastic products could greatly reduce household waste and emissions. Investing in infrastructure—from the reuse of materials to water systems—would facilitate more effective resource management.
At the state and local levels, revising building codes to stipulate construction with reusable materials whenever feasible would reduce large amounts of construction waste. Mass timber, in particular, has the potential to be reused extensively. And sustainable building materials like mass timber have numerous co-benefits. Mass timber is more fire-resistant than traditional wood and less emissions-intensive than cement and steel.
The current patchwork regulatory system forces U.S. consumers and municipalities to handle waste however they deem responsible or economically feasible. But without the cooperation of the private sector, communities are often left with limited options. Companies are not incentivized to prioritize longevity or responsible disposal in their products. For that reason, products are rarely reusable, recyclable, or compostable. Reducing waste at scale requires systemic change backed by an economic paradigm shift.
Other EESI Waste Management and Recycling resources:
View more entries tagged as Waste
Advancing science-based solutions for a sustainable, resilient, and equitable world
Top-Rated Climate Nonprofit – 4-Star Charity