thesis about managing waste

2020 Theses Master's

Stop Filling the World with Trash: A Study of Circular Waste Management Strategies in NYC

Gonzalez Samot, Luis Argelis

This thesis seeks to understand the impacts and ramifications of solid waste generation and waste management strategies in New York City. It is concerned with the relationship between solid waste and the mass production and mass consumption patterns associated with the take-make-waste industrial economic model. Additionally, the investigation examines the circular economy as an alternative to take-make-waste. Special attention is given to the environmental and societal implications of continuing in the current linear industrial system and the urgency to move towards a circular economy. “Stop Filling the World with Trash: A Study of Circular Waste Management Strategies in NYC” addresses the following questions: what are the current municipal solid waste management strategies? Where does the solid waste go post-collection and how is it transported? What policies are being considered to address the negative externalities related to solid waste and Waste Management? What role can the circular economy play in minimizing the negative environmental and societal impacts of waste management? What are the implications of adopting a circular economy? Does moving to a circular economy require changes to the regulatory framework? The findings suggest that shifting to a circular or sustainable economic model is urgent. If we continue in the linear system of mass production and mass consumption, the negative effects to people and the environment may become irreversible. However, making this paradigm shift will entail a concerted effort among the public and private sectors, and civil society.

Geographic Areas

• New York (State)--New York
• Refuse and refuse disposal--Management
• City planning--Economic aspects
• City planning--Environmental aspects
• Global warming
• Recycling (Waste, etc.)

More About This Work

• DOI Copy DOI to clipboard

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Waste Mismanagement in Developing Countries: A Review of Global Issues

Environmental contamination due to solid waste mismanagement is a global issue. Open dumping and open burning are the main implemented waste treatment and final disposal systems, mainly visible in low-income countries. This paper reviews the main impacts due to waste mismanagement in developing countries, focusing on environmental contamination and social issues. The activity of the informal sector in developing cities was also reviewed, focusing on the main health risks due to waste scavenging. Results reported that the environmental impacts are pervasive worldwide: marine litter, air, soil and water contamination, and the direct interaction of waste pickers with hazardous waste are the most important issues. Many reviews were published in the scientific literature about specific waste streams, in order to quantify its effect on the environment. This narrative literature review assessed global issues due to different waste fractions showing how several sources of pollution are affecting the environment, population health, and sustainable development. The results and case studies presented can be of reference for scholars and stakeholders for quantifying the comprehensive impacts and for planning integrated solid waste collection and treatment systems, for improving sustainability at a global level.

1. Introduction

Solid waste (SW) mismanagement is a global issue in terms of environmental contamination, social inclusion, and economic sustainability [ 1 , 2 ], which requires integrated assessments and holistic approaches for its solution [ 3 ]. Attention should be paid in developing and transition countries, where the unsustainable management of SW is common [ 4 ]. Differences should be highlighted between developing big cities and rural areas, where management issues are different, specifically regarding the amount of waste generated and the SW management (SWM) facilities available [ 5 ]. However, both suffer negative economic legislatives, political, technical and operational limitations [ 6 ].

Uncontrolled disposal generates serious heavy metals pollution occurring in the water, soil, and plants [ 7 ], open burning is cause of CO, CO 2 , SO, NO, PM 10 and other pollutant emissions that affect the atmosphere [ 8 ], waste picking within open dump sites pose to serious health risk people working on these areas [ 9 ], release of SW in water bodies improve the marine litter globally, enhancing environmental contamination [ 10 ]. Therefore, SW mismanagement is cause of sever and various environmental and social impacts, which do not allow improvements in sustainable development.

Achieving both economic growth and sustainable development involves reduction plans of the global ecological footprint, changing the way of produce-consume-waste of goods and resources [ 11 ]. The material footprint of developing countries grew from 5 t inh −1 in 2000 to 9 t inh −1 in 2017, representing a significant growing in living standards, although its sustainable management is not still included in national regulations [ 12 ]. The principles of sustainable development were introduced within the sustainable development goals (SDGs), where 17 objectives were introduced for reducing poverty, improving social equality, decreasing environmental pollution and ameliorating city livability. In particular, the global waste management goals for improving sustainability at global level are: to ensure, by 2020, access for all to adequate, safe and affordable SW collection services; to stop uncontrolled dumping and open burning; to achieve sustainable and environmentally sound management of all wastes, particularly hazardous ones, by 2030 [ 13 ].

Many studies reported possible solutions for improving the SWM in developing countries, such as organic waste buyback programs, with compost or biogas production [ 14 ], implementation of waste-to-energy plans and technologies [ 15 ], waste-to-energy in parallel with recycling of glass, metals, and other inert [ 16 ], production of energy from biomass waste by making briquettes [ 17 ], involvement of the integration of waste pickers with legal incentives [ 18 ], among others. However, many barriers still remain for improving formal collection, treatment and final disposal [ 19 ]. Therefore, environmental contamination remains a big issue worldwide, while common solutions should be identified and implemented considering SWM patterns appropriate for each context.

Many reviews were published about SWM in developed and developing countries and about environmental contamination from waste. In particular, about char fuel production [ 20 ], management of waste electric and electronic equipment (WEEE) [ 21 ], food waste management [ 22 ] and treatment [ 23 ], recycling of used batteries [ 24 ], inclusion of the informal sector [ 25 ] and the risks that such activity pose for vulnerable informal workers [ 26 ], atmospheric pollution due to SWM [ 27 ], household hazardous waste management [ 28 ] and healthcare waste (HW) management [ 29 ], among others. The novelty of the narrative review presented in this article is its focus on the integrated assessment of these waste streams, analyzing the global issues affecting the environment and the public health, giving attention to the operational risk of the informal recycling sector. Concentration of contamination in water, air and soil are provided, as well as waste quantities and amounts dumped in developing cities or recycled by the informal sector. Results allow suggesting directions for future SWM improvements, considering its planning as an integrated system and providing examples of the consequences of its inadequate implementation.

The paper is divided in three main sections: the first analyzes the environmental impacts due to unsustainable management of municipal SW (MSW), WEEE and used batteries, waste tires, C&D waste and other hazardous and industrial wastes; the second is focused on the informal recycling, analyzing main risks due to waste picking and opportunities for its inclusion within the formal SWM system. The last section is a critical discussion of current and future challenges for improving environmental quality at global level, identifying the opportunities due to SWM selective collection and treatment systems. Finally, some suggestions are provided, according to the literature review.

This article reviews the open dumping and open burning of waste, main practices implemented for waste treatment and disposal in developing countries, involving many environmental and health impacts [ 30 , 31 , 32 ]. Such unsustainable practices include every waste fraction, such as MSW, HW, construction & demolition (C&D) waste, used tires, WEEE, used batteries, and industrial waste, each one spreading specific contaminant concentrations in soil, water and air environments. Waste pickers work within these sites for collecting recyclable materials that are sold in local markets. Though this informal practice allows decreasing the amounts of waste inflow into water bodies and open dumps [ 33 , 34 ], it is also a hazardous activity that improves health and occupational risks [ 35 , 36 ]. Therefore, concerning waste open burning and open dumping, the narrative review presented in this article explores environmental impacts due to unsustainable SWM, such as water, air and soil pollution, health and operation risks, global warming potential (GWP) and marine pollution. The theoretical framework of the review is schematically reported in Figure 1 .

Theoretical framework of the review: source of contamination due to SW mismanagement.

The scientific literature considered was collected from three main databases: Scopus, Web of Science and Science Direct. The keywords used for reviewing the literature were the ones that refer to the issues concerning solid waste management in developing countries, therefore combining the keywords “solid waste” and “developing countries” with: open burning, open dumping, informal recycling, health risk, environmental contamination, air-water-soil pollution, C&D, HW, WEEE, used batteries, industrial waste, marine litter. Only papers wrote in English were considered. The scientific articles were reviewed during the months of January and February 2019, analyzing only the literature from 2002 to 2019. Case studies and reviews were considered for the research, with particular focus on developing cities and contaminated area in Latin America and the Caribbean, Africa, Eastern Europe, Middle East, Asia and Oceania. Developed countries were considered only for specific case studies, such as fire of waste tires in final disposal sites and the comparison of same issues detectable worldwide, such as the marine litter in the Mediterranean Sea. Treatment technologies and collection systems were not assessed in terms of contribution of pollution and health risks.

3. Environmental and Social Issues due to SW Mismanagement

3.1. msw open dumping.

In developing countries, the management of SW is worsened by unsustainable practices that improve the environmental contamination and the spread of diseases. In particular, the open dumping in uncontrolled sites, open burning of waste fractions and the mismanagement of the leachate produced in final disposal sites, are the main issues detectable [ 37 ]. The situation is worsened in slum areas with additional problems of high-density population, traffic, air and water pollution. Uncontrolled disposal in open spaces near water bodies are issues widespread in these contexts, which corresponds to public health issues [ 38 ]. Concerning open air final disposal, the main environmental impacts detectable are:

• visual impacts,
• air contamination, odors and green-house gasses (GHG) emission,
• vectors of diseases,
• surface water and groundwater pollution.

These issues are visible worldwide. In Banjul (Gambia) the dump site is located in a densely populated area, visible to the residents [ 39 ]. It has a negative visible impact on inhabitants and tourists visiting the country. In particular, the smoke from burning debris is the biggest issue, which covers parts of the residential areas, affecting also the life quality of the population. Indeed, the citizens are affected by the smoke from burning debris and the smell of decomposing waste. The nuisances are worst during the rainy period as the area becomes infested with flies and insects. Run off from the dump site with contaminants dissolved inflow into water bodies, while the leachate contaminates the soil and groundwater. Moreover, environmental contamination is due to the high level of fecal and total coliform that polluted the wells located near the site. The households that live around the dump site use well water for various purposes, although with high level of coliforms attributed to the proximity to the dump site [ 39 ].

In Cambodia, in the capital city Phnom Penh, where the MSW management (MSWM) system lacks regulation, households commonly burned, buried, or dumped about 361,000 tons of MSW in 2008, and 635,000 tons in 2015 [ 40 ]. In Thailand, more than 60% of the SW final disposal was carried out by open dumping. In 2004 there were 425 disposal sites, of which 330 open dumps, the majority of disposal sites received around 25 tons of waste per day, while only the landfills of Bangkok received about 4500 tons per day [ 41 ]. In the West Bank Palestinian territory, in 2005 was estimated that the MSW generated was about 2728 t per day, while in 2001 there were 133 MSW dumpsites, open burning activities at 116 sites and burial at 13 sites; 64.9% of the population was aware of the environmental issues and impacts associated with open dumpsites, and 41.6% thought that they were suffering from the final disposal sites [ 42 ]. In Abuja, the capital city of Nigeria, more than 250,000 tons of waste were generated per year in 2010. There were four major disposal sites under its management, closed in 2005 due to odors, air pollution and burning wastes at the site. Moreover, percolation of leachate from the buried waste flowed to the surface, especially during rainy seasons [ 43 ]. In Maputo, administrative center of Mozambique, with about 1,200,000 inhabitants and where about 0.5 kg of waste per inhabitants are generate daily, the MSW is transported to the official dumpsite of the city, in operation since more than 40 years. The area is of about 17 ha, with heights that achieved 15 m; open fires and auto ignition of the waste are common issues, exacerbated by the more than 500 waste pickers collecting recyclables waste at the dumpsite [ 44 ]. Therefore, SWM issues are common worldwide, with environmental burdens and hazard for the population.

The landfill leachate generates in open dump sites contains concentration of organic carbons, ammonia, chloride, heavy metals [ 45 ], as well as high concentrations of fluoride, chloride, ammonium–nitrogen, biological oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demand (COD) [ 46 ]. For instance, the MSW dumped at Mathkal dump site (Kolkata, India), is affecting the degradation of water quality in and around dumpsite area: Cd and Ni are detectable in leachate, improving groundwater contamination; the metals Pb, Cd, Cr and Ni are characterized as toxic for drinking water, and the concentration of these components increases near an unsanitary landfill and may lead to serious toxic risks. Indeed, It has been reported that the concentration of Cr, Cd, and Mn were higher in the groundwater due to leachate, affecting the life of the population and the quality of the environment [ 47 ].

In Chennai city, the capital of Tamil Nadu, India, where more than 3200 t d −1 of SW are generated, the leaching of heavy metals in the water imposes serious health risks to humans. Heavy metal concentration of the soil samples at various depths ranges from 3.78 mg kg −1 to 0.59 mg kg −1 at a depth of 2.5 to 5.5 m, with concentration higher in the top soil up to a depth of 5.5 m (sandy clay layer). Therefore, the concentrations of heavy metals decreased with increasing soil depth, demonstrating the influence of the dumping activities [ 48 ]. In Nonthaburi dumpsite, Thailand, the concentration of heavy metals was detected in boreholes and runoff. Within the runoff and the groundwater, the concentrations of chrome, cadmium, lead, nickel and mercury, are always 10 times above the limits introduced by the World Health Organization (WHO) for drinking water [ 49 ]. In Tiruchirappalli district, India, the MSW generation is about 400–600 tons per day and it is served by an open dumping site located 12 km from the city. The leachate shows that the range of COD range to 29,880–45,120 mg L −1 and the BOD 5 / COD ratio was less than 0.1. Based on the average concentration, the quantity of lead and cadmium were 5 and 11 times higher the soil contamination limits. The presence of heavy metals (Pb, Cu, Mn, and Cd) in soil sample, undetectable in the near areas, indicates that there was appreciable contamination of the soil by leachate migration [ 50 ].

In Table 1 pollutant concentrations in soil, runoff and groundwater in eight different case studies, compared with the limits imposed by international organizations for soil and water quality are reported. In the case studies reviewed, the analysis was implemented at a distance variable from 20 to 400 from the final disposal sites. Data about runoff and groundwater contamination were compared with drinking water limits since, in low-middle income areas, groundwater is the most use for drinking without adequate treatments. Results reported always a correlation between leachate and environmental contamination. Heavy metals are always the ones persistent within the samples, also 10 times more than the limits suggested by the WHO, with high concentrations of COD. So, open dumping poses surrounding population to serious health risks.

Contaminants’ concentration in soil, runoff and groundwater due to open dumping in eight case studies, compared with international standard of soil contamination limits and drinking water.

Note: Soil contamination limits [ 56 ], Drinking water limits [ 57 ], * water release after wastewater treatment.

Another environmental issue due to organic waste open dump is the GWP due to waste anaerobic degradation. Methane gas is a by-product of landfilling MSW; since MSW is mainly disposed of in open dump sites, the generated methane is released directly to the atmosphere. Experimental studies indicate that the anaerobic biodegradation of MSW organic waste generates about 200 Nm 3 of methane per dry tons of biomass [ 58 ]. Methane is one of the most important gas that improve the GWP, 25 times higher than CO 2 [ 59 ]. Therefore, open dumps and uncontrolled landfills are direct source of GHG.

As a comparison, GHG emissions from waste landfilling were estimated per type of final disposal site: open dump, conventional landfills with energy recovery, and landfills receiving low-organic-carbon waste. The results showed that about 1000 kg CO 2 -eq. t −1 are generated from an open dump, 300 kg CO 2 -eq. t −1 from a conventional landfilling of mixed waste and 70 kg CO 2 -eq. t −1 for low-organic-carbon waste landfills. If compared with the emissions due to provision of energy and materials to the landfill, estimated to 16 kg CO 2 -eq. t −1 , it can be stated that open dump cause a GWP at least 50 times higher than the total MSWM system [ 60 ]. In Beijing City, where more than 60% of the waste is disposed of in sanitary landfills, an environmental impacts assessment showed that CH 4 emission is the most dominant contributor to GWP, with the annual amount of 55,000 tons; the landfills contribute the most to the impact potentials mainly due to methane emissions [ 61 ]. In India, most of the SW are disposed of by landfilling in open dump sites, generating large quantities of CH 4 . At national level, It was estimated that the methane emission from MSW disposal varies from 263,020 t in year 1980 to 502,460 t in year 1999 [ 62 ], increasing rapidly during the years.

Therefore, the mitigation of pollution and GHG emission can be obtained through the recovery and conversion of organic component to energy or compost. The main role is played by policy interventions, which should act through the incorporation of the waste management hierarchy considering direct and indirect impacts that would reduce the global carbon footprint [ 63 ].

3.2. Marine Litter

Open dumping cause surface water pollution due to leachate mismanagement and material uncontrolled flows. A visible impact that is affecting the seas and the oceans globally is the marine littering, which is mainly caused by plastic waste [ 64 , 65 ]. Marine litter is defined as manufactured or SW entering the marine environment irrespective of the source. The range and scale of impacts from marine litter are diverse [ 66 ]:

• Environmental (ingestion, poisoning, blockage of filter, physical damage of reefs and mangroves, among others),
• Social (loss of visual amenity, loss of indigenous values, risks to health and safety),
• Economic (cost to tourism, cost to vessel operators, losses to fishery, costs for cleanup, animal rescue operations, recovery and disposal),
• Public safety (navigational hazards, hazards to swimmers and divers, cuts, abrasion and stick injuries, leaching of poisonous chemicals, explosive risk).

About 80% of marine litter generation is mainly caused by the mainland, by the rivers that inflow into the seas [ 67 ]. Therefore, open dumping can be considered as the first cause of pollution of the oceans. More hazardous is the generation of micro-plastics: Once in the ocean, most plastics tend to stay at or close to the surface where the photo-chemical, mechanical and biological processes degrade larger items into smaller, less than 5 mm, forming microplastics [ 68 ]. Potentially, microplastics are ingested when present in the marine environment and tend to float on the sea surface. There, they can be ingested passively or actively by a wide range of organisms [ 69 ]. A simple scheme has been provided by do Sul et al. [ 69 ], where the definition of direct or indirect ingestion of micro-plastic, which can affect human health, is clarified ( Figure 2 ).

Schematic analysis of the trophic chain of micro-plastic in the marine environment, for explaining plastic direct and indirect ingestion [ 69 ].

A study published in 2019 reported that, in the Mediterranean Sea, microplastics are 94.6% in number and 55% wt of all plastics whereas meso-plastics represented 5.3% in abundance and 45% in weight of all plastics. In this study, only 1 macro-plastic was sampled, which represented 0.1% in abundance of all plastics and weighed five times more than all the collected plastics together [ 70 ]. It means that the amounts of micro-plastic are increasing, improving the risk of direct and indirect intake within the trophic chain, achieving human feeding. Moreover, a study conducted in the Pacific Ocean, discovered plastics from the 1960s, which means that the marine littering and the pollution of the sea is 60 years old, improving the amount of microplastics detectable into the marine environment [ 71 ].

The implementation of sound waste management collection and disposal practices, involvement of manufacturers, and behavior change are key aspects of any solution. At an intermediate stage, innovation is needed around the litter generation points: upstream, redesigning goods for reducing generation quantities; and downstream, improving collection and treatment systems. Long-term technical solutions for recovering the existing used plastics in the world’s seas should also be implemented [ 37 ]. Finally, a specific focus on low-middle income countries should be considered, since they are the main source of pollution although the generation rates are the lowest.

3.3. MSW open Burning

Waste open dumping is not the only environmental burden due to waste mismanagement. The combustion of waste with any precaution generates also contaminants, improving health risks to the population [ 72 ]. Polychlorinated dibenzo- p -dioxins (PCDDs), polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs), and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were detected in soils around dumping sites in The Philippines, India, Cambodia, and Vietnam [ 73 ]. Uncontrolled combustion, generation of methane gas, and low-temperature burning are major factors for the formation of dioxins in dumping sites. Considerable loading rates of PCDD/Fs in the dumping sites of these countries (200–4000 tons per day) were observed, ranging from 0.12–35 mg TEQ yr −1 [ 73 ].

Open dumping sites in Surabaya and Palembang, Indonesia, have concentrations of PCDD/Fs and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls (DL-PCBs) in soil of about 61,000–310,000 fg TEQ g −1 (dry weight) and 6300–32,000 fg TEQ g −1 , respectively. Low levels of PCDD/Fs and DL-PCBs, ranging from 75 to 98 and 0.32 fg TEQ g −1 , respectively, were observed in soil for an open dumping site that included a top cover layer of soil. The difference in concentrations can be explained by the fact that open burning of waste is the source of PCDD/Fs and DL-PCBs. A sensitivity analysis implemented in this area found that the maximum emission factor could be 5,600,000 fg TEQ g −1 [ 74 ].

A controlled incineration that treated about 100,000 t of MSW per year, required for a city of about 350,000 inhabitants who generate about 0.8 kg MSW per day, generates about 40,000 fg TEQ m −3 [ 75 ], which is equal to 24 mg TEQ yr −1 , considering a production of 6000 m 3 of combustion gases per ton of waste burned. Therefore, open dumping can generate more quantities of dioxins per year than an incinerator, also with uncontrolled leachates, diseases vectors, odors and GHG, affecting the environment and population’s health.

In the Municipality of Huejutla, Mexico, approximately 24% of the total waste generated was burned by households, of which 90% in rural areas, where there was not an MSW collection system. This practice generates environmental contamination and contributes to the GWP by the production of black carbon (BC). It has estimated that about 8,882 tons of waste are burned per year, producing 1.97 kg BC t −1 , 11.9 kg PM 10 t −1 , and 9.8 PM 2.5 t −1 that contributed for 17.5 t BC y −1 (38,553 t CO 2 -eq per year), 105.7 t PM 10 y −1 and 87.0 t PM 2.5 y −1 , for a total of 313.7 kg CO 2 -eq y −1 per capita. The results showed that the CO 2 -eq from BC emitted by waste open burning was more than 15 times larger compared to CH 4 potentially released from the decomposition of equivalent amounts of combustible organic waste deposited at the dumpsite [ 76 ]. In another study, it was found that the majority of PM generated by waste open burning had smaller sizes (PM 1 ) compared to PM 2.5 and to PM 10 . In particular, the PM size were 0.35 µm, with about 63.0 µg m −3 generated, and 0.45 µm, with 67.8–87.7 µg m −3 . Therefore, 0.45 µm had the highest peak concentration among all the compounds. The study demonstrated that the smallest-sized particles (0.35 and 0.45 µm), which represents the most hazardous for the population health, constituted the greatest percentage of total PM emissions, founding that the concentration of ultrafine particles represent another source of hazard for population health [ 77 ]. The review of the scientific literature indicated that open burning should be avoided and replaced with appropriate and sustainable technologies for reducing environmental pollution and public concerns. Know-how is required, as well as financial support for improving waste recovery and final disposal at global level.

3.4. Health and Environmental Risks due to HW Mismanagement

SW is not only municipal. There are various fractions hazardous for the environment and the population health that are generally mismanaged in developing countries. One of these fractions are the HW [ 78 ]. The term HW includes all the waste generated within health-care facilities. In addition, it includes the same types of waste originating from minor and scattered sources, including waste produced during health care undertaken at home. Between 75% and 90% of HW is comparable to MSW, so “non-hazardous” or “general HW”. The remaining 10–25% of HW is hazardous and may pose a variety of environmental and health risks [ 79 ]. Details about HW fractions is reported in Table 2 .

Categories of HW as reported by the WHO [ 79 ].

Open dumping is the most common method of HW disposal in developing countries [ 80 , 81 , 82 ], although several authors suggest sterilizing the HW at the point of generation in order to eliminate infectious substance and improve safety management [ 83 ]. Open dumping is the lowest cost option for low income countries, although it is an uncontrolled and inadequate disposal, since the waste can be accessible to waste pickers and animals and the generation of pollutant is not monitored. In this way, HW transmits infectious pathogenic micro-organisms to the environment either via direct contact, through inhalation, ingestion, or indirect contact through the food chain. Burning is aimed to reduce the volume of waste and its infectious effect, however, uncontrolled burning activates are potential source of toxic emissions like PCDD/F, among other pollutants [ 84 ].

In the West Bank (Palestine), a study shows that 82.2% of HW is disposed of in (unsanitary) dump sites and only 17.9% of healthcare facilities dispose of their waste more than 7 times a week, the frequency recommended by the WHO. Therefore, the final disposal locations in the West Bank are uncontrolled final disposal sites, which are randomly distributed throughout the region, with poor precautions for transporting and colleting the HW [ 85 ]. In Ibadan, Nigeria, more than 60% of HW handlers did not discriminate between HW and MSW during collection and handling stages. Similarly, 66% dispose of HW with MSW at the final disposal site (open dumps). Incidences of contacting diseases are prevalent among waste handlers, compared to incidence of other hospital staff, with high incidences of viral blood infections, such hepatitis B and C. Within the open dump sites, technical and hygienic considerations are neglected or absent. For instance, several waste pickers were observed collecting HW for reselling materials considered recyclable, to pass-on to unsuspecting low-income patients. Moreover, leachate from waste disposal sites could be infiltrating and contaminating groundwater resources [ 86 ]. In Dhaka, Bangladesh, HW is collected by waste pickers who sort the waste through the bins searching for recyclables and reusable items (syringes, blades, knives, saline bags, plastic materials and metals). Scavenging activities were again observed sorting through the open dumping disposal sites, increasing the risk of diseases ( Figure 3 ). The study reported that both scavengers and recycling operators had any knowledge of the risks from HW exposure. Employers of recycling operators did not consider occupational health and safety training for their employees. The situation was still more worrying among the marginal groups of the society [ 87 ].

Informal HW scavenging in Dhaka, Bangladesh [ 87 ].

The lack of appropriate HW management systems and disposal facilities in Dhaka is largely due to inadequate economic resources and legislation. This leads to the persistence of inappropriate practices such as the discharge of chemical waste into the general sewerage system or dumping into near land. HW was found to have been dumped in MSW bins, and finally disposed of on general landfill sites, which may contaminate the ground water and improve operational risks. It was observed that, during the rainy season, leachate from dumps used for HW infiltrated into water that was being used for washing and for household purposes, as well as for agriculture [ 88 ].

Therefore, in low-income countries, HW management is an environmental and social issue that spread the risk of disease and pollution. Disposal strategies involve sorting HW at the healthcare facilities, and then transporting the infectious HW to safe disposal sites, where it is treated by incineration or other technologies and the residual product landfilled. Every treatment technology has drawbacks, with incineration creating atmospheric emissions, and other treatments not able to handle all types of waste. The best way to control the impact of HW is to train healthcare workers along with the implementation of standardized HW streams and disposal bin colors, which can ensure a selective collection of the waste, improving the efficiency of treatment and final disposal [ 89 ]. Good results were obtained in San Salvador (El Salvador), where an information campaign was implemented for the employee of tertiary hospitals. Before the activity, the employees disposed of common waste in containers for infectious waste, increasing the hospital’s financial and operational burden, while after the project the quantities were halved, demonstrating the good compliance of the operators and of the activities implemented [ 90 ].

3.5. Open Dumping and Burning of WEEE and Used Batteries

Global WEEE generation has reached approximately 41 million tons in 2014, increasing at a rate of 3–5% every year [ 91 ]. The production of WEEE was correlated with the GDP, while there is no significant correlation or trend with the population. If this waste is properly recycled, it could offer an opportunity for the recovery of copper, gold, silver, palladium and other metals with an estimated value of USD 48 billion. In particular, the concertation of metals in the WEEE is significantly higher than in the natural ores that these metals are mined from (for Au it is almost 130 times higher) [ 91 ]. WEEE are classified into six different types of waste [ 92 ]:

• Temperature exchange equipment: refrigerators, freezers, air-conditioner, heat pump,
• Screens and monitors: televisions, monitors, laptops, notebooks, tablets,
• Lamps: fluorescent lamps, high-intensity discharge lamps,
• Large equipment: washing machines, clothes dryers, electric stoves, large printing machines, copying machines, photovoltaic panels,
• Small equipment: vacuum cleaners, toasters, microwaves, ventilation equipment, calculators, radio, camera, toys, medical devices, small monitoring and control equipment,
• Small telecommunication equipment: mobile phones, GPS, telephones.

Developing countries are producing WEEE double than developed countries. It is also estimated that the developing and developed countries will discard 400–700 million obsolete computers by 2030. Moreover, developed countries are also exporting their WEEE to developing countries for dumping, causing serious environmental and social concerns. The majority of WEEE are being sent to Africa or Asia [ 93 ]; in Figure 4 are reported the estimated flows of the waste from high income to low income countries.

Estimation of the legal and illegal WEEE flow from high-income to low-income countries at global level [ 94 ].

WEEE is becoming a source of income for the industries and creates new jobs. However, in developing countries WEEE are mainly disposed of in open dump sites, burned without properly precautions and managed by illegal actors [ 95 , 96 ]. In India, Bangalore city generates 18,000 tons of WEEE per year, thousands of which are landed illegally every year [ 93 ]. In Lagos State, Nigeria, near an open dump site where WEEE and used batteries are disposed of with MSW, the heavy metal concentrations in well water and soil were investigated during the dry season [ 97 ]. Results reported that concentrations in wells were Pb 2.77 mg L −1 , Cd 0.035 mg L −1 , Zn 0.948 mg L −1 , Cr 0.520 mg L −1 and Ni 1.45 mg L −1 , while Ni concentrations in soils ranged from 35.45 mg kg −1 at a depth of 15–30 cm in the wet season to 85.43 mg kg −1 at a depth of 0–15 cm in the dry season. The elevated level of metals in the well water are correlated with the metal input from leachates resulting from the dumping of WEEE. In fact, significant levels of Pb and Ni were found in well and tap water at the residences, while the concentrations of heavy metals decreased when the sampling distances from the dumpsite increased [ 97 ]. Moreover, concentrations of lead, chrome and nickel are generally higher than the ones reviewed in studies conducted near MSW open dumps ( Table 1 ), suggesting that the presence of high amounts of WEEE is cause of heavy metal pollution of water bodies and soils.

In Tijuana (Mexico), a study analyzed the concentrations of Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb and Ni in the soil near an open dump site where end-of-life vehicle (ELV) and WEEE are disposed of, together with the activity of waste pickers who recover the precious metals [ 98 ]. The mean concentrations found were 1.4 mg kg −1 for Cd, 4.7 mg kg −1 for Cr, 304 mg kg −1 for Cu, 74 mg kg −1 for Pb and 6 mg kg −1 for Ni. The results of the geo-accumulation index values show that the site was very polluted with Cu and Pb. The correlation analysis shows a high connection between Pb and Cu, which would be explained if the main source of the polluting heavy metals was the result of electrical wire burning to recover copper. The other two components detected within the study were Cr and Ni, related to the corrosion of junk metal objects and automobile use [ 98 ]. Again, in this case study, it is evident that the presence of WEEE is responsible of heavy metal pollution of the soil and therefore of the groundwater used for house uses. Therefore, within Table 1 results of open dumps that also contains WEEE, used batteries and ELV were reported.

Together with WEEE mismanagement, used batteries should be also mentioned. For instance, in Iran, almost 10,000 tons of household batteries were imported, most of them have been discarded in MSW without any separation and sent to sanitary landfills [ 99 ]. In addition to environmental and human health risks associated with unsafe disposal of used batteries in MSW stream, their landfilling implies the depletion of valuable resources. It is expected that more than 9000 tons of used batteries have been dumped in municipal landfills of Iran in recent decades. The most concern regarding battery disposal in MSW is directed to the high percentage of mercury, cadmium, lithium, nickel, arsenic and other toxic and heavy metals [ 99 ].

The challenges facing the developing countries in WEEE and used batteries management include the absence of infrastructure for appropriate waste management, lack of legislation dealing specifically with these waste fractions, the absence of any framework for end-of-life product take-back or implementation of extended producer responsibility (EPR) [ 100 ]. Moreover, the growing rate of WEEE amount in developing countries is destined to increase in the next future [ 101 ]: A great amount (almost 50%) of current WEEE yearly generated by developed countries continues to be illegally transferred in developing countries, volumes that remains unknown; New electric and electronic products will substitute soon the current ones, influencing both collected volumes, type of recovered materials and recycling processes; Innovative materials composing WEEE, that are currently not correctly managed during their end-of-life (ending into landfills); some electronic parts in WEEE are not again correctly disassembled or recovered [ 101 ]. In summary, many challenging issues of WEEE and used batteries management can be detected in developing countries [ 102 ]:

• Quantity of WEEE generated is a major concern due to the lack of infrastructure,
• Inventory assessment of WEEE does not exist,
• Exportation of WEEE from developed countries to developing countries for recycling worsens its management,
• Absence of knowledge regarding the toxic nature of WEEE and used batteries,
• Portion or components of WEEE are often mixed with MSW and disposed of in open dump sites,
• Deficient knowledge of the impacts to human health and the environment,
• Legislation to regulate and control the import and disposal of the generated WEEE do not exist.

Environmentally sound management requires the establishment of collection, transportation, treatment, storage, recovery and disposal of WEEE. Regulatory authorities should have to provide these facilities and for the better performance there should be incentives. Communication campaigns should be oriented to the citizens, in order to improve and incentive the selecting collection of the waste, avoiding open dumping. Furthermore, incentives for municipalities that demonstrate the best results when participating in recycling initiatives should be adopting, in order to motivate the citizens in supporting local management policies and actions [ 103 ].

3.6. C&D Waste open Dumping

The term “C&D waste” is generally used to refer to the SW generated in the construction sector. More specifically, the term is defined as the waste generated from construction, demolition, excavation, site clearance, roadwork, and building renovation [ 104 ]. The main issue due to C&D waste is final disposal site landslides, which can affect the life of the population. For avoiding this impact, the volume of waste dumped in landfills should be reduced, imposing safe operating practices. In particular, 4Rs (reduce, reuse, recycle and recover) policies should be implemented, with hazardous or toxic materials that should be the primary targets [ 104 ]. As example, in 2015, a landslide in one of China’s most advanced cities, Shenzhen, killed 73 people and damaged 33 buildings, in the absence of heavy rainfall or earthquakes ( Figure 5 ). According to China’s Ministry of Land and Resources, the landslide was triggered by the collapse of an enormous pile of C&D waste [ 105 ].

C&D waste landfill landslide in Shenzhen, China [ 105 ].

In Thailand, in 2014 the average generation of C&D waste was approximately 4,200,596 tons, which were disposed of in open dump sites. Hazardous and potentially hazardous materials were found, such as:

• asbestos-based materials,
• lead-based materials,
• other materials used for construction (e.g., damp-proofing chemicals, adhesives),
• mercury-containing electrical equipment (e.g., fluorescence lamps, thermostats),
• chlorine fluoride carbides (e.g., air conditioners and refrigerators),
• corrosive, flammable and toxic materials.

Hazardous waste was not separated from non-hazardous waste for proper treatment and disposal. It means that an increasing of the construction sector also contributed to the increasing of environmental pollution [ 106 ]. It has been estimated that between 2002 and 2005, an average of 1.1 million tons of C&D waste was generated per year in Thailand [ 107 ]. This constitutes about 7.7% of the total amount of waste disposed in both landfills and open dumpsites annually during the same period. Therefore, the generation of C&D waste was affected by a relevant increase. Indeed, recently, the management of C&D waste took attention due to its rapidly increasing and unregulated dumping [ 108 ]. Waste generation at a construction site may result from lack of attention being paid to the size of the products used, lack of interest of contractors, lack of knowledge about construction during design activities, and poor materials handling. Generally, 50–80% of C&D waste is reusable or recyclable, so C&D mismanagement represents a loss of valuable economic resources [ 107 ].

In Hanoi, Vietnam, processing quantities of informal and formal C&D waste recyclers were revealed [ 109 ]. However, current practices lacked appropriate C&D waste classifications and control of waste flows by private companies due to little efficiency or cost saving strategies, low attention for adding value to concrete waste recycling and lack of government legislative and financial support for industry transformation. Illegal dumping occurs in the city boundary, also due to the lack of technology, capacity and economic resources. Many construction sites mix C&D waste such as cement, bricks, steel, and plastics, disallowing the classification and recycling of these fractions [ 109 ]. In Malaysia, in the first quarter of 2015, the construction industry contributed 15.1% of the country’s GDP and provided employments to about 10% (1.4 million) of the total workforce in Malaysia. Four key issues were addressed for developing an effective C&D waste management: the increasing amount of waste, environmental impacts, illegal dumping, and lack of national support. In Malaysia, the recycling framework for improving C&D waste management is built following a three-layer approach [ 110 ]: At the micro-level, reducing wastes at the source; at meso-level, ensuring that there is a continuous effort in managing wastes, transforming the procurement methods; Finally, at the macro-level, providing monitoring, and coordinating mechanisms to ensure the practice of effective C&D waste management [ 110 ].

Therefore, for developing countries with limited financial resources, C&D waste management initiatives and sustainable construction can be achieved through effective utilization of resources, material recovery, and an improved system for waste management. However, the first objective to be achieved is the implementation of strong regulatory initiatives for construction waste management [ 111 ]. These practices can reduce the issue of the open dumping, which is worsened by the mix with MSW and informal recycling that operates in these uncontrolled areas.

3.7. Diseases Exposure due to Used Tires open Dumping and Burning

Tires that are used, rejected or unwanted are classified as ‘waste tires’, as well as tires intended to be used for retreading or recycling. This type of waste is composed of steel, rubber and textiles, and the volume depend on the use of the tires. Three main issues should be addressed concerning waste tires:

• big volumes, which reduce the useful life of the sanitary landfill and improve the transportation costs,
• open air burning of these materials, which contaminate the environment improving population health risks,
• presence of disease vectors, such as insects or rodents, which live inside the holes and furrows of the tires.

In developing countries, limited data reliability on used tires availability and collection is common, as well as small activities of uncontrolled waste recovery, with cases of illegal dumping [ 112 ]. One of the most hazardous problems regards the spread of Dengue, which is currently one of the most important diseases in tropical areas. About 2.5 billion people live in areas of risk and many millions of cases occurring each year [ 113 ]. A study assessed the breeding mosquito larvae, identifying the dengue vectors distributed in Tamilnadu (India). Totally 118 water containers were inspected, among which 38 containers were recorded as positive for dengue vector. Among all type of containers analyzed, cement cistern, mud pot and used tires were positive for the mosquito larvae [ 113 ]. Therefore, the final disposal in open dump sites of waste tires should be avoided for reducing the spread of Dengue diseases in topical areas.

Another impact that affect the population health is the uncontrolled burning of waste tires. In Nepal, where the uncontrolled open-air burning of waste tires is practiced also during political agitation, a study was conducted to provide background information for assessing the environmental pollution due to tire fires [ 114 ]. The effect of the tire fires on air is a major concern, because they release potentially hazardous gases such as CO, SO 2 and NO 2 as well as polyaromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) and volatile organic compounds (VOC). CO is formed whenever carbon or substances containing carbon are burned with an insufficient air supply. Tire fires, apart from intense heat, give off BC with CO emission. Results of the research reported that the emission levels of CO from different type of tires were 21–49 g kg −1 , SO 2 emission was found to be 102–820 g kg −1 , while NO 2 emission was 3–9 g kg −1 [ 114 ]. These emissions can be compared with wood combustion, in order to have an indication about the pollutants of major concerns due to tires burning. Emissions of pollutants from residential wood combustion sources in wood-burning stoves are NO x —NO 2 0.5 g kg −1 , SO x —SO 2 0.2 g kg −1 , CO 83–370 g kg −1 and PM 0.6–8.1 g kg −1 while in fireplaces are of NO x —NO 2 1.8 g kg −1 , SO x —SO 2 absent and CO 11–40 g kg −1 [ 115 ]. Therefore, it is evident that the generation of sulfur compounds generate more environmental concern in terms of quantity produced if compared with wood fire.

Open fire issues are also detectable in high-income countries, where waste tires landfills are still an issue. A large and uncontrolled fire of a tire landfill started in Toledo (Spain), and experimental analysis were implemented for measuring the potential impact at local and regional levels [ 116 ]. Outdoor and indoor measurements of different parameters were carried out at a near school, approximately 700 m downwind the burning tires. Among metals, ZnO and Co were 21 and 92 times higher than an area far from the open fire, reaching 933 µg m 2 , compared with 13 µg m 2 in the farther zone. Increases of SO 2 and PM 10 levels were also detected, with sulfate concentrations of 1371 µg m 2 , 11 times higher than the control zone [ 116 ]. A similar study was conducted in the Iowa city landfill, (United States), where the outdoor concentrations of pollutants generated from 18 day tire fire were assessed [ 117 ]. The study estimated maximum concentrations of tire fire PM 2.5 smoke at distances of 1, 5 and 10 km of 243, 55 and 26 mg m −3 , respectively. SO 2 , PM 2.5 , BC, and air toxic VOC had also high concentrations if compared with areas far from the fire. In another study, where tire smoke was investigated, BC, biphenyl, benzene, benzaldehyde, PM, and CO were highly ranked hazards [ 117 ].

These environmental issues due tire open dumping and open burning should be addressed in an integrated manner, in order to avoid these practices. One suggestion provided by various authors is to introduce the EPR, to ensure environmentally effective management of end-of-life waste, following 4Rs [ 118 ]. This regulation tool wants to prevent waste formation and promote source reduction. If this is not possible, waste should be reused, recycled, and then recovered for energy, while landfilling should be avoided. Accordingly, the tire EPR system should reduce the generation of tire waste, facilitate its reuse, promote recycling and other forms of material recovery and, finally, incentive the energy recovery, although LCA studies confirmed that the material recycling of tire waste provides greater environmental benefits than energy recovery [ 118 , 119 , 120 ].

3.8. Industrial Waste open Dumping

Finally, environmental contamination due to industrial waste mismanagement should be considered, since they are mostly hazardous. There are many different types of hazardous industrial waste, as well as source of contamination, such as mine tailings, fly ash, waste from the production of chemicals (e.g., phosphoric acid), residues from coal mining, acidic waste rock, carbide slag, among others [ 121 ].

In a tanneries area located in Ranipet (India), where chromate chemicals were manufactured, a large quantity of hazardous SW was stacked in open dump sites. This practice resulted in fast migration of the contamination to the groundwater, with levels of chromium up to 275 mg L −1 , 1000 times higher than the recommendations of the WHO for drinking water. The findings are of relevance for addressing the groundwater pollution due to indiscriminate disposal practices of hazardous waste [ 122 ]. A primary lead smelter operated in Santo Amaro City in Brazil, from 1960 to 1993, leaving approximately 500,000 tons of industrial waste containing 2–3% of lead and other toxic elements that contaminated the soil. The waste was deposited on the grounds belonging to the smelter, without any cover or precaution. In 2008 the average concentrations in soil were 1040 mg kg −1 for Pb, 2.73 mg kg −1 for Cd, 22 mg kg −1 for Ni, 295 mg kg −1 for Zn and 5.2 mg kg −1 for As, with a strong correlation among Cd, As and Zn. Therefore, the contamination due to heavy metals persists during 15 years, affecting the population surrounding the site, in particular the youngest [ 123 ]. In Dar es Salaam City (Tanzania), industrial waste (paints, pharmaceuticals, rubber, plastic, metal scraps, packaging materials, among others) are disposed with MSW within open dump sites. The dump of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes poses serious public health and environmental issues, since rainwater leach from the waste to the groundwater contaminating the surrounding areas [ 124 ]. Same issues regard the agriculture industries, with the production of waste related to pesticide containers and spry solutions. For example, in rural areas of Greece, farmers are used to dumping the empty containers on irrigation canals or in the field, sometimes burning or troughing them in others waste open dumps, generating river, soil and atmospheric contamination [ 125 ].

These results show that also industrial waste management is an underestimated issue and should be treated with appropriate methodologies and technologies. SW collection represent the first step, avoiding open dumping, after which a selective collection should be implemented in order to allow the recovery of valuable materials. Afterwards, incineration, chemical physical treatments, and appropriate final disposal should be implemented in function of the waste fraction generated, such as waste oils and solvents, batteries, emulsions and chemicals, sludges and refractory materials, among others [ 126 ].

4. Informal Recycling and Social Inclusion

Worldwide, there is a considerable presence of the informal sector in SWM, particularly in low-middle income cities where formal selective collection systems for recyclable materials are not still developed [ 127 ]. Informal activities tend to intensify in times of economic crises and where imported raw materials are quite expensive. However, its inclusion in formal SWM systems remain a problematic issue and considerable attention from NGOs and scholars is arising for solving such problem [ 37 ].

In Figure 6 is reported a simplified scheme that represent the selective collection chain of the informal sector [ 128 ]. The structure is of a specific case study in China, however, the structure is similar worldwide. The informal pickers collect the waste in open dump sites, bins, roads and households for segregating recyclable materials. These people can be organized or alone, with or without transportation means, and can be merchants or simply pickers. The waste is then sold to trading points that collect the waste and sell it again to formal or informal recyclers or directly to manufactures. This structure can be recognized in many case studies within the scientific literature.

Informal recycling chain in China, as schematically depicted by [ 128 ].

Many studies were implemented and published, in order to assess how the informal sector could be included in the formal management or recognized by the local population. For instance, in Ulaanbaatar (Mongolia), the informal sector operates in t informal neighborhoods. In these areas, illegal dumping is common, and some open fields became uncontrolled disposal sites, with waste pickers working and living near these areas. In 2004, the World Bank estimated that about 5000 to 7000 informal recyclers worked in Ulaanbaatar, and today this number could be higher due to the increase in city’s population. A study in the city revealed that most waste pickers have also higher education at a university, suggesting that the activity is due to many factors (e.g., lack of work). Informal waste pickers select recyclable materials and bring them by foot to secondary dealers for obtaining an income, who then sell larger quantities to the respective recycling industries [ 129 ].

In Blantyre (Malawi), MSW is disposed of in pits, along the road-side, or in the river. Waste pickers process and transform recyclable materials reducing the amount of waste disposed at dumpsites and decreasing the use of virgin materials needed for manufacturing. However, waste pickers are rarely recognized for their contribution. The two waste categories selected by the pickers are plastic and metals. No data are available for quantifying the number of waste pickers, however it was estimated that the maximum quantity of waste selected per day was about 20–30 kg d −1 [ 130 ]. In Harare, Zimbabwe, where the quantities of waste generated within the city are not known, the informal sector operates, mainly in open dump sites. Indeed, the waste collected by the formal collection is disposed of in dumpsites, where about 220 waste pickers worked. Waste pickers required a license to enter the dumpsite and had to wait for a worker’s signal before they could start recovering materials. It was estimated that the informal recycling sector recovered about 6–10% of waste deposited at the final disposal site (about 27–50 tons per day). Competition with others pickers was considered as the major challenge for the collectors, as well as workplace health and safety and discrimination among the population [ 131 ]. In Zavidovici (Bosnia Herzegovina), where solid waste is disposed of in open dumps, informal recycling represents the main income-generating activity for a group of ethnically discriminated households. These families contribute to the recovery of iron, copper, plastics and cardboard from MSW, reducing the waste inflow into the dump sites [ 132 ]. Finally, in Iloilo City (The Philippines), where some 170 tons of waste (about 50% of the total generated) are disposed of in an open dumpsite, approximately 300 households recover recyclable materials for selling them in local markets. A pilot project with international NGOs was implemented, in order to convert the organic waste into energy through briquette production. Results of the study show that the integration of the informal sector in the production of biomass briquettes can be a good option for implementing integrated plans for including informal recyclers, especially in areas where their activity is forbidden, as in The Philippines [ 133 ].

In Table 3 , seven case studies are compared in order to assess which are the number of pickers, their organization, its source of waste, the quantities and the fractions collected per day and the main issues detected by the studies. Results reported that waste pickers operate both in low income (Zimbabwe) and high-income countries (China). Mostly, informal sector collect waste from uncontrolled open dump sites and are not recognized or organized by the local municipalities. Waste pickers can collect from 14 to 60 kg of recyclable waste per day, which comprehend WEEE, MSW and HW.

Comparison of the waste pickers’ activity among seven different countries worldwide.

Note: (No.) number, (N.A.) not available.

Regarding the environment and the recovery of resources, the benefits are evident in many cities. In some places informal-sector service providers are responsible for a significant percentage of waste collection. In Cairo (Egypt), the informal recycling is implemented since the recyclable waste recovered are sold to the private companies, while the organic fractions are used for breeding pigs [ 137 ]; in Dhanbad Municipality (India), informal recyclers play an important role in the plastic waste management, collecting the recyclable plastic waste from landfills, rendering environmental and social benefits [ 138 ]; In Bogotá (Colombia), informal recyclers collect materials from waste, motivated by profits, due to the free-market enterprise for recycling [ 136 ]; in Nuevo Laredo (México), where migration has increased the population to over 250,000 inhabitants, unemployed informal recyclers recovered 20 kg of aluminum cans and cardboard per day, making in one day the minimum-wage of one week of a factory worker [ 139 ]. In all these international realities, the main factors that allows the activity of the informal sector is the presence of low-income communities, unemployment, lack of MSW collection and the free management of waste.

Therefore, the activity of the informal sector contributes directly to the recovery of the materials and the reduction of environmental contamination. This practice is in accordance with the circular economy (CE) principles. The objective of the CE is closing of material loops, to prevent waste from final disposal, and transforming the resulting residual streams into new secondary resources [ 140 ]. It proposes a system where 4Rs provide alternatives to the use of raw virgin materials, making sustainability more likely [ 141 ]. The CE typically includes economic processes such as “reverse logistics” or “take back” programs that recover wastes for beneficial reuse, avoiding final disposal costs, often reducing raw material costs and even generating incomes [ 142 ]. Therefore, the inclusion of the informal sector represents a key strategy for improving the CE concepts, improving social, environmental and economic sustainability [ 143 ].

The activities of the informal sector regard the degree of formalization, from unorganized individuals in dumpsites, to well organized cooperatives. Therefore, issues such as exploitation by middlemen, child labor and high occupational health risks need to be challenged for addressing sustainability [ 144 ]. Globally, SWM remains a negative economy, where individual citizens pay the cost, the financial viability of recycling is disputed, and the sector remains vulnerable to great price volatility. Most of the collection systems in developed countries are subsidized, and also result in substantial exports of recyclables in global secondary resources supply chains. Moreover, if taxes, health insurance, child schooling and training provisions, management costs and other typical costs are included within the informal waste sector, it is not clear if the sector come back to being unsustainable economically [ 144 ].

It is recognized that a door-to-door collection service of source-separated recyclables may be one of the best solutions for improving RR. Therefore, the informal sector has the opportunity to deliver important environmental benefits, becoming an active agent of behavior change. Moreover, its activity can reduce the waste inflow into water bodies, decreasing the amount of marine litter in the oceans. The inclusion of the informal recycling should be more investigated, assessing pros and cons of its activity in different realities worldwide [ 144 ].

5. Discussion

From the review, it is clear that there is a strong linkage between poor SWM and environmental/health issues. The rapid increase in population, economic growth, urbanization and industrialization improve the generation of SW at global level, boosting environmental contamination when such SW is not managed. Indeed, in many developing countries waste is scattered in urban centers or disposed of in open dump sites. The lack of infrastructure for collection, transportation, treatment and final disposal, management planning, financial resources, know-how and public attitude reduces the chances of improvement, as pointed out also by other authors [ 145 ]. In Table 4 the main source of contamination and health risks due to SW mismanagement for each waste stream are summed up.

Environmental and health risks due to waste open burning and open dumping for different waste streams.

Nevertheless, the generation of SW can be also considered a source of opportunities: generation of renewable energy, new employment, new economic advantages, private investments and improvement of population awareness about environmental issues. In developing countries, the informal sector plays the main role in recycling where plastic, glass, metal and paper have a developed market. Appropriate strategies should be introduced for supporting these activities, such as improved public awareness, enaction of specific laws and regulations and implementation of SWM infrastructures. For instance, a study conducted in Bogotá (Colombia), found that the main external requirements for including the activity of the informal sector regards the recognition of recyclers’ work, the formal alliances with the productive sector and the stabilization of the prices of recycling material [ 146 ]. Therefore, actions should be implemented both by private companies and local governments.

Support can be provided with the assistance of NGOs, private companies or international funds, for boosting the 4Rs, which included waste separation at the source involving residents, institutions, local governments and local companies. A good example was provided in Managua, Nicaragua, where over the last five years, several international cooperation projects have focused on the improvement of SWM systems creating multi-stakeholder platforms, designing and implementing joint activities for improving technical capacity and awareness, boosting the implementation of integrated and appropriated projects [ 147 ]. Therefore, some recommendations should be introduced for improving the SWM systems at global level, as also suggested by other authors [ 148 ]:

• Improve public education and awareness among citizens and waste pickers,
• Improve financial sustainability of the SWM systems,
• Involve several stakeholders for improving system resilience,
• Include safety precautions in the informal recycling sector,
• Implement studies for assessing waste composition and characteristics.

In developing countries, in agreement with the results of a LCA study, good environmental protection can be accomplished by recycling and composting, since high amounts of organic fraction MSW are associated with environmental impacts [ 102 ], while inclusion of the informal sector is suggested due to the low economic investment required and technological simplicity [ 149 ]. Such options are in agreement with the circular economy (CE) principle, an emerging topic that has attracted research interest. However, three components should be included in the definition of CE [ 150 ]: re-circulation of resources and energy, recovering value from waste; implementation of multi-level approach; assessing the innovation introduced within the society. These principles are mainly implemented in European countries and in China, while in low income countries these activities are still under development [ 151 ]. Furthermore, another study found that the main incentive for the development of SWM in municipalities was the economy; the environment and public health are only secondary drivers [ 152 ]. CE patterns specific for developing countries should be introduced, focusing on big cities, since financial sustainability, multi-level approaches, and energy recovery are options that to date are not affordable in these contexts. Therefore, the scientific literature and research should move to this direction, providing sustainable solutions for low-middle income countries and appropriate technologies for boosting the CE.

6. Conclusions

The article presented a narrative review about environmental contamination and social issues in developing countries due to SW mismanagement. Results show that the SWM system should be considered in an integrated manner in order to cope with the reduction of the environmental footprint and to improve the targets of the SDSs. Too many times, SWM is considered as a single stream disposed in open dump sites. However, the implementation of future management plans requires the application of ad hoc collection and treatment solutions for each waste flow produced in municipal areas: MSW (organic and inorganic), HW, C&D waste, WEEE and used batteries, industrial and hazardous waste and used tires. Stakeholders and governments should know that SWM is a complex system that involves environmental, social and economic issues, which should be evaluated holistically for improving the life cycle of waste, reducing water, soil and air contamination due to open burning and open dumping, practices widespread worldwide.

Inclusion of the informal sector can be considered a viable way for improving the recycling rate and reducing the waste inflow into final disposal sites in developing countries, due to low technological requirements and economic investments. However, further investigations and efforts should be implemented for understanding the most appropriate strategy for its involvement. In Latin America various pilot project were implemented by the organization of cooperatives including waste pickers that have provided good results. However, in some areas of Asia and Africa this practice is forbidden and represents an obstacle to a formal selective collection system. Therefore, specific patterns should be implemented for each context, exploiting the activities just in place introducing the CE principles, remembering that informal recycling cannot be the only system in action; improving waste collection and selective collection coverage of municipal areas, introducing awareness and information campaigns, implementing appropriate treatment systems with regulations and control agencies, improving final disposal sites and its management, enhancing financial sustainability of the systems and introducing future management plans are all practices required for improving the integrated SWM system of a country, region, municipality or rural area.

From this review it is clear that common projects should be introduced at a global level in order to reduce the environmental contamination and health issues due to waste open dumping and burning. Authorities and the actors involved in waste management should be aware of the global issues which are affecting sustainable development, providing such information to the population for spreading awareness and its inclusion in recycling and prevention activities, also available within the scientific literature and this review. It should be specified that waste mismanagement has impacts at three levels: municipal or local impacts, such as soil and groundwater pollution, spread of diseases due to animal vectors (mosquitos, rodents) and air contamination; regional impacts, due to pollution of waterbodies used for agriculture and household purposes; global impacts, such as global warming and marine littering. Therefore, a common front should be organized for reducing these impacts globally, for improving environmental conditions and sustainable development.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, methodology, investigation, data curation, writing—original draft preparation, and writing—review & editing, N.F.; Supervision, V.T.

This research was funded by The Rotary Foundation, grant number GG1758711 Scholarship provided by the Clubs Rotary Bassano del Grappa Castelli and Rotary Sopocachi La Paz.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

• Bibliography
• More Referencing guides Blog Automated transliteration Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Automated transliteration
• Relevant bibliographies by topics
• Referencing guides

Optimizing the Life Cycle of Last-Mile Packaging

• Sustainability

More than 85 million tons of cardboard waste are created annually, with most ending up in landfills. This capstone project aims to develop a mathematical optimization model to help last-mile delivery companies reduce their carbon dioxide (CO2) footprint by collecting and reusing cardboard cartons. Specifically, the optimization model suggests from which customers cardboard boxes should be collected during a delivery route, considering practical constraints such as limited vehicles' capacity and maximum driving time. Our results indicate that collecting all potential cardboard boxes is not imperative to achieve the highest possible reduction in CO2 emissions.  

• Refuse Disposal
• Environmental Engineering
• Engineering
• Solid Waste Management

Challenges of Solid Waste Management and factors influencing its effectiveness: A case study in Burao Municipality

• September 2019
• Thesis for: MASTER OF ARTS IN SOCIAL RESEARCH
• Advisor: Dr.Ali Yassin sheikh Ali

• Burao University (Burco, Somaliland)
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Tafadzwa Muyambo

• Nath Sharma

• Xiangbin Yan

• Chandra Ishwar

• James P. Donnelly
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTAGE OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS: A CASE STUDY ON SELECTED PUBLIC BUILDING PROJECTS IN ADDIS ABABA

2023, MANAGING AND MINIMIZING WASTAGE OF CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS ON SELECTED PUBLIC BUILDING PROJECTS IN ADDIS ABABA

Waste is a significant issue in the building sector, impacting the nation's economy and the environment. This study aims to identify primary waste causes in the Ethiopian construction industry and develop strategies to prevent and eliminate these issues. The research involved 113 questionnaires from construction firms in Ethiopia. The main causes of material waste include manufacturing defects, over ordering, rework, wrong material handling, ambiguities, and material damage. Most construction companies attempt to reduce waste at the source, but recycling is more effective when combined with other waste reduction strategies. The study concluded that considering construction waste increases national income, encourages companies to decrease waste, and keeps the environment clean. The study recommends the establishment of new building waste departments in municipalities and ministries, waste management rules, and efficient approaches to reduce construction waste. Owners should use contractors' prior experience with waste management when awarding contracts, designers should consider material and component dimensions, and contractors should create waste management plans and allocate qualified workers and employees to construction projects.

Related Papers

Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry (TOJQI)

Prof. Dr. Subash Thanappan , Galeta Chala

All over the world, the development of construction related industries depend on the natural and artificial resources. The generation of wastes from the construction industries and its management is a big task for the proponents and stake holders of the industry. The quantity of waste generation from the construction industryis highly related to the construction methods, improper management, the onsite sorting and recycling abilities for construction waste, the levels of education and trainingsgiven to workers and the design concepts. The current research focuses to identify the contributory factors that influences the generation of construction material wastage.In addition, the study aims to deeply analyze the impact of construction material waste on cost at building construction project and recommends the strategies to minimize the construction material wastage. Data collection was done through questionnaire survey and interviews among the different stake holders in building construction (Clients, Consultants, Contractors and other Professionals) in Addis Ababa. Stratified Sampling technique was considered as a tool to opt for the Sites with regards to all the civil engineering professionals, stakeholders like contractors, consultants, and clients.The current study focuses in identifying and analyzing the major impacts of the construction material wastage at building construction site in Kolfe Keranio sub city, Addis Ababa. The outcome of the result would bring strong information to clients, consultants and contractors and other stakeholders in minimizing the overall cost due to material wastage.

Asmara Seyoum

ABSTRACT Construction industry is an industry, which is involved in the planning execution and evaluation (monitorin g) of all types of civil works. Physical infrastructures such as buildings, communication & energy related construction works, water supply & sewerage civil works etc. are some of the major projects (program) in the construction industry. Construction industry plays an important role in social, economical & political development of a country. Construction is not only one of the major sectors of an economy but it is also the largest and accounts from 12% to 25% of the GNP of both developed & developing countries. It consumes the higher percentage of the annual budget of a country; specifically in our country Ethiopia, it covers 58% of the annual budget. However, the industry has been experiencing such problems as managing and minimizing wastage of construction n materials due to lack of effective management and planning. One of the very important sections that should specify in the construction project management is managing and minimizing wastage of construction materials at construction projects. The successf ul execution of construction projects within given cost, time and quality, good handling of construction materials on construction site requires systematic planning and controlling of the construction works. This explains also that the management of materials becomes the most pertinent source of construction waste. The type of materials produced to serve the industry range from raw goods such as sand, aggregates, soil and water to manufactured goods such as bricks, cement, plasterboard, metals (steel and iron), timber, concrete, cement, and plaster. Because of a high rate of consumption of these materials, waste is generated in large quantities, which can have significant impact on the environment. Now a day‟s in Ethiopia construction industries are booming due to implementing major infrastructure projects together with many public buildings, commercial building and housing development programmes. Therefore, this research were attempt to assess the current situation of managing and minimizing wastage of construction materials in the Addis Ababa on selected public building construction projects and formulate and give recommendations with respect to handling of construction materials in accordance with the outcome of the paper. The main tools for the collection of data included questionnaires, interviews and site visit were used to identify the various efforts that have been made in the past to evaluate and examine the causes and sources of construction materials waste on building construction project. Simple statistical analysis involving tables and percentages were used in analyze the results from the questionnaire. Secondary sources of data were obtained from relevant literature that covered research, publication on the subject matter. The findings of this research indicate that the level of contribution of the waste sources to the generation of waste saw differences between the perceptions of the respondents (Contractors, consultants and client). The results from analysis ranked from the first to fifth positio n by contractors, consultants and owners that the most significant factors causing construction waste on building construction projects are: - Site supervision factors, Materials handling and storage factors,Design and documentation factors, Site management and practices factors and Operations factors. The results of this study recommended that there is a need to establish a new construction waste department to develop waste management policies and develop the effective strategy to reduce construction waste. The study recommended the owners to take the waste management history of the contractors as a criterion in awarding contracts. The study recommended the consultants to give attention to avoid design and planning errors at the design and planning stages. The study also recommended the contractors to assign qualification staff and workforce in construction projects and to prepare waste management plan. Key words: - Benefits of Waste Minimization, Causes and sources of materials, Construction, Construction m aterials, Construction Materials Management, Waste managing & Waste minimizing.

26th Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction

Tadesse Ayalew

Journal of Engineering Science

Tamene Adugna

Construction sites generate a large amount of material wastes and have become a common problem with associated risks in Ethiopia. However, the sources of such wastes are not well recognised. Therefore, the purpose of this research was to analyse the risk factors that contribute to material wastes in building construction projects. To achieve this goal, the factors that cause construction wastes were identified from literature and construction experts via focus group discussions and personal interviews. Following this, the factors were subjected to a questionnaire survey to identify the most critical factors of construction wastes. The questionnaire was distributed purposively to 85 construction experts representing contractors, consultants, and clients and 70 questionnaires were duly received for analysis. The data were analysed with a mean score and ranked to identify the most critical factors generating material wastes at construction sites. According to the results of the study f...

Muhwezi Lawrence

Nihal A. Osman

The rapid economic growth and urbanization in Ethiopia have led to extensive construction activities in major cities. Construction activities have known to generate large quantities of wastes that pose serious environmental problems. This paper presents the challenges of construction waste management practices in Mekelle city and explores appropriate measures to address the issues in a more sustainable way. Field observation, questionnaire survey, interviewing of public sector officials at different levels was conducted to identify the source and management options of construction waste in the city. The findings showed that the majority of survey participants felt that their firms have taken various measures to manage construction waste. It was revealed that 40% of the respondents exercise illegal dumping as a common method of waste management, which is closely followed by reuse and recycling. It is evident that over 75% of the construction- generated has potential for recycling and...

American Journal of Civil Engineering

Garba Wokjira Fayisa

In the construction industry, construction material is one of the major cost components and it is 50% to 70% of the total construction cost. However, the industry generates 30%-65% of wastage for landfill. Effective use of construction material is profitable in the industry as well as in the economy of any country. However, material wastage management in construction are rarely studied by Ethiopian context. Hence, this research is aimed to investigate cause of construction material wastage and rank highly wasted construction material wastage on public building projects in western Oromia. The Study uses both primary and secondary data by structured questionnaires and case study (interviews and site visits). The research has covered a population of General and Building contractors from level one to three and their supervisor’s that are employed in western Oromia on public buildings. The purposive sampling techniques were used to collect the data and Analyzed and presented by mean scor...

International Journal of Engineering Research and Technology (IJERT)

IJERT Journal

https://www.ijert.org/the-perspective-of-tradesmen-on-material-wastage-in-the-construction-industry https://www.ijert.org/research/the-perspective-of-tradesmen-on-material-wastage-in-the-construction-industry-IJERTV9IS080086.pdf Construction material wastage has been identified as a major threat to the environment, cost of delivery, and project duration. This paper sought to identify the significant level of the major sources and factors influencing material wastage from the perspective of tradesmen and to assess the quantities of the various categories of waste on building construction sites in the Upper West Region of Ghana. The study was carried out employing both open and closed-ended questionnaire survey. A total of 150 respondents representing different trades were involved in the study. The findings revealed that frequent design changes and poor design, excessive quantities of materials than required, poor material handling and storage on-site, poor strategy for waste minimization, and poor site management and conditions were the highest-ranking factors that influence construction material waste generation. It was further revealed that wood, sandcrete block, concrete, and metal were the most wasteful construction materials. The study recommended the investment of considerable efforts to ensure due diligence to improve all contractual documents. Contractors should endeavour to employ qualified on-site technical supervising and administrative staff to implement and safeguard effective site management practices to ensure material waste minimizing.

Emmanuel C EZE , Eyong Obenke Patrick , Osusha Loya

Material waste generated by the activities of the construction industry poses serious danger to both the construction projects concerned and the environment at large. Previous researches both at local and international level have neglected construction operatives and craft men who are the majority stakeholder. The study was aim to assess the perception of construction operatives, Tradesmen and Artisans on materials waste generation in the construction industry, with a view to encouraging better performance of construction projects in Nigeria. The study employed questionnaire survey. Tables and figures where used to present the collected data and Mean item score (MIS) and percentage were used to analyze the data collected. Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U-Test were used to test the hypotheses. It was discovered that formwork from wood/timber, Mortar from Rendering/plastering and Blockwork/ Brickwork are the most wasteful material generated on sites; Design (Frequent design changes and poor design), Poor materials storage system and Theft and vandalism are the most important factors that influence material waste generation during construction; Proper site supervision and management techniques, Adequate storage of material, and Staff training and awareness on waste management are the measures of minimizing construction material waste; and saving cost of disposal and transport, increased profit and save construction time loss are the most important benefits of material waste minimization. It was recommended that site operatives and craft men should be carried along in every management decision regarding waste management plan development as they constitute the major stakeholders on sites.

International journal of engineering research and technology

George Dokyi

Construction material wastage has been identified as a major threat to the environment, cost of delivery, and project duration. This paper sought to identify the significant level of the major sources and factors influencing material wastage from the perspective of tradesmen and to assess the quantities of the various categories of waste on building construction sites in the Upper West Region of Ghana. The study was carried out employing both open and closed-ended questionnaire survey. A total of 150 respondents representing different trades were involved in the study. The findings revealed that frequent design changes and poor design, excessive quantities of materials than required, poor material handling and storage on-site, poor strategy for waste minimization, and poor site management and conditions were the highest-ranking factors that influence construction material waste generation. It was further revealed that wood, sandcrete block, concrete, and metal were the most wasteful...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

The Ijes The Ijes

anteneh solomon

Dr. Kofi Agyekum

Journal of Engineering and Technology

Isaac Abiodun Odesola

Ulil Albright

Olatunji Oladiran

Abdulkadir Sani

Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

Samuel Tongo

Dr. STANLEY UGOCHUKWU

Afolabi A Dania (PhD)

International Journal of Engineering Research and

Micah Makworo

KIU Journal of Social Sciences

SAMUEL OSAYAMEN TONGO

Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies and Management

Timothy Adewuyi

International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research

Andualem E . Yadeta

Sustainability

Ademilade Aboginije

Imoro A B U B A K A R I Zarouk, PhD

IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science

Jati Hatmoko

Acta Structilia

Idowu Albert

Claudia De Cesare

Journaljournal of Korean Society of Environmental Engineers

ali hussien

International Journal of Sustainable Construction Engineering and Technology

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Healthcare Waste Management for Hospitals in Resource-Constrained Settings: What Determines Effective Implementation?

Add to collection, downloadable content.

• January 19, 2022
• Affiliation: Gillings School of Global Public Health, Department of Health Policy and Management
• The effective management of healthcare waste is a critical component of a hospital’s infection control program and is central to occupational safety for healthcare workers and the health of the environment and community. In low-income countries, where hospital administrators are burdened by resource constraints and struggle to maintain basic health services, healthcare waste management (HCWM) can be a significant challenge. There are, however, examples of hospitals in low-income countries that are effectively implementing HCWM systems that use new technology and practices and focus on reducing, reusing and recycling their waste. This research aimed to identify the determinants of effective implementation of the HCWM systems in three such hospitals located in Kathmandu, Nepal. This study utilized a multiple case study design with a mixed methods approach. A conceptual model for implementation effectiveness of complex innovations in organizational settings was used to guide the study design. The key findings from this study identified four determinants that facilitated effective implementation across all sites including 1) the presence of an innovation champion within the hospital who advocated for use of the system; 2) a strong perception of the primary users (nurses and ward attendants) that use of the system contributed to fulfillment of their group values such as doing no harm to patients and service to the community; 3) a partnership with a technical organization; and 4) strong implementation policies and practices. The study identified one determinant that acted as a barrier to effective implementation across all sites; hospital staff perceived that it was difficult for hospital visitors to comply fully with policies that required visitors to segregate all waste at source. There were differences in motivation to adopt and implement HCWM systems depending on the type of hospital (private, public, non-profit). The length of implementation and management engagement were also found to influence the level of implementation effectiveness. The findings suggest that large hospitals in low-income countries like Nepal can effectively manage their waste through systems that minimize harm to the environment, hospital staff and surrounding communities. The study provides recommendations for the type of support and inputs needed for effective implementation.
• August 2015
• medical waste
• healthcare waste management
• infection control
• implementation science
• hospital management
• Health services administration
• Environmental health
• Public health
• https://doi.org/10.17615/3jwb-bh64
• McPherson_unc_0153D_15671.pdf
• Dissertation
• In Copyright
• Babich, Suzanne
• Rutala, William
• Weiner, Bryan
• Robinson, Janet
• Doctor of Public Health
• University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
• Chapel Hill, NC
• There are no restrictions to this item.
• January 21, 2016

This work has no parents.

Select type of work

Master's papers.

Deposit your masters paper, project or other capstone work. Theses will be sent to the CDR automatically via ProQuest and do not need to be deposited.

Scholarly Articles and Book Chapters

Deposit a peer-reviewed article or book chapter. If you would like to deposit a poster, presentation, conference paper or white paper, use the “Scholarly Works” deposit form.

Undergraduate Honors Theses

Deposit your senior honors thesis.

Scholarly Journal, Newsletter or Book

Deposit a complete issue of a scholarly journal, newsletter or book. If you would like to deposit an article or book chapter, use the “Scholarly Articles and Book Chapters” deposit option.

Deposit your dataset. Datasets may be associated with an article or deposited separately.

Deposit your 3D objects, audio, images or video.

Poster, Presentation, Protocol or Paper

Deposit scholarly works such as posters, presentations, research protocols, conference papers or white papers. If you would like to deposit a peer-reviewed article or book chapter, use the “Scholarly Articles and Book Chapters” deposit option.

Decades of public messages about recycling in the US have crowded out more sustainable ways to manage waste

Founder, KnoxFill, University of Virginia

Associate Professor of Engineering and Co-Director, Convergent Behavioral Science Initiative, University of Virginia

Postdoctoral fellow, University of Virginia

Professor of Public and Environmental Affairs, Indiana University

Disclosure statement

Michaela Barnett is the founder and owner of KnoxFill, a company that sells bulk and refillable household and personal care goods.

Shahzeen Attari receives funding from the National Science Foundation.

Leidy Klotz and Patrick I. Hancock do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

University of Virginia and Indiana University provide funding as members of The Conversation US.

View all partners

You’ve just finished a cup of coffee at your favorite cafe. Now you’re facing a trash bin, a recycling bin and a compost bin. What’s the most planet-friendly thing to do with your cup?

Many of us would opt for the recycling bin – but that’s often the wrong choice . In order to hold liquids, most paper coffee cups are made with a thin plastic lining, which makes separating these materials and recycling them difficult.

In fact, the most sustainable option isn’t available at the trash bin. It happens earlier, before you’re handed a disposable cup in the first place.

In our research on waste behavior , sustainability , engineering design and decision making , we examine what U.S. residents understand about the efficacy of different waste management strategies and which of those strategies they prefer. In two nationwide surveys in the U.S. that we conducted in October 2019 and March 2022, we found that people overlook waste reduction and reuse in favor of recycling . We call this tendency recycling bias and reduction neglect.

Our results show that a decadeslong effort to educate the U.S. public about recycling has succeeded in some ways but failed in others. These efforts have made recycling an option that consumers see as important – but to the detriment of more sustainable options. And it has not made people more effective recyclers.

A global waste crisis

Experts and advocates widely agree that humans are generating waste worldwide at levels that are unmanageable and unsustainable . Microplastics are polluting the Earth’s most remote regions and amassing in the bodies of humans and animals .

Producing and disposing of goods is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions and a public health threat, especially for vulnerable communities that receive large quantities of waste . New research suggests that even when plastic does get recycled, it produces staggering amounts of microplastic pollution .

Given the scope and urgency of this problem, in June 2023 the United Nations convened talks with government representatives from around the globe to begin drafting a legally binding pact aimed at stemming harmful plastic waste. Meanwhile, many U.S. cities and states are banning single-use plastic products or restricting their use .

Upstream and downstream solutions

Experts have long recommended tackling the waste problem by prioritizing source reduction strategies that prevent the creation of waste in the first place, rather than seeking to manage and mitigate its impact later. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and other prominent environmental organizations like the U.N. Environment Programme use a framework called the waste management hierarchy that ranks strategies from most to least environmentally preferred.

The familiar waste management hierarchy urges people to “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle,” in that order. Creating items that can be recycled is better from a sustainability perspective than burning them in an incinerator or burying them in a landfill, but it still consumes energy and resources. In contrast, reducing waste generation conserves natural resources and avoids other negative environmental impacts throughout a product’s life.

R’s out of place

In our surveys, participants completed a series of questions and tasks that elicited their views of different waste strategies. In response to open-ended questions about the most effective way to reduce landfill waste or solve environmental issues associated with waste, participants overwhelmingly cited recycling and other downstream strategies.

We also asked people to rank the four strategies of the Environmental Protection Agency’s waste management hierarchy from most to least environmentally preferred. In that order, they include source reduction and reuse; recycling and composting; energy recovery, such as burning trash to generate energy; and treatment and disposal, typically in a landfill. More than three out of four participants (78%) ordered the strategies incorrectly.

When they were asked to rank the reduce/reuse/recycle options in the same way, participants fared somewhat better, but nearly half (46%) still misordered the popular phrase.

Finally, we asked participants to choose between just two options – waste prevention and recycling. This time, over 80% of participants understood that preventing waste was much better than recycling.

Recycling badly

While our participants defaulted to recycling as a waste management strategy, they did not execute it very well.

This isn’t surprising, since the current U.S. recycling system puts the onus on consumers to separate recyclable materials and keep contaminants out of the bin. There is a lot of variation in what can be recycled from community to community, and this standard can change frequently as new products are introduced and markets for recycled materials shift.

Our second study asked participants to sort common consumer goods into virtual recycling, compost and trash bins and then say how confident they were in their choices. Many people placed common recycling contaminants, including plastic bags (58%), disposable coffee cups (46%) and light bulbs (26%), erroneously – and often confidently – in the virtual recycling bins. For a few materials, such as cardboard and aluminum foil, the correct answer can vary depending on the capacities of local waste management systems.

This is known as wishcycling – placing nonrecyclable items in the recycling stream in the hope or belief that they will be recycled. Wishcycling creates additional costs and problems for recyclers, who have to sort the materials, and sometimes results in otherwise recyclable materials being landfilled or incinerated instead.

Although our participants were strongly biased toward recycling, they weren’t confident that it would work. Participants in our first survey were asked to estimate what fraction of plastic has been recycled since plastic production began. According to a widely cited estimate, the answer is just 9% . Our respondents thought that 25% of plastic had been recycled – more than expert estimates but still a low amount. And they correctly reasoned that a majority of it has ended up in landfills and the environment.

Empowering consumers to cut waste

Post-consumer waste is the result of a long supply chain with environmental impacts at every stage. However, U.S. policy and corporate discourse focuses on consumers as the main source of waste, as implied by the term “post-consumer waste.”

Other approaches put more responsibility on producers by requiring them to take back their products for disposal , cover recycling costs and design and produce goods that are easy to recycle effectively . These approaches are used in some sectors in the U.S., including lead-acid car batteries and consumer electronics, but they are largely voluntary or mandated at the state and local level.

When we asked participants in our second study where change could have the most impact and where they felt they could have the most impact as individuals, they correctly focused on upstream interventions. But they felt they could only affect the system through what they chose to purchase and how they subsequently disposed of it – in other words, acting as consumers, not as citizens.

As waste-related pollution accumulates worldwide, corporations continue to shame and blame consumers rather than reducing the amount of disposable products they create. In our view, recycling is not a get-out-of-jail-free card for overproducing and consuming goods, and it is time that the U.S. stopped treating it as such.

This article has been updated to clarify that decisions about whether to recycle, compost or dispose of certain materials as trash can vary depending on local waste management systems.

• Climate change
• Consumption
• Consumer behaviour
• US Environmental Protection Agency
• Waste management
• Plastic waste
• Municipal solid waste
• Extended producer responsibility
• Microplastic pollution

Educational Designer

Lecturer, Small Animal Clinical Studies (Primary Care)

Organizational Behaviour – Assistant / Associate Professor (Tenure-Track)

Apply for State Library of Queensland's next round of research opportunities

Associate Professor, Psychology

You're reading a free article with opinions that may differ from The Motley Fool's Premium Investing Services. Become a Motley Fool member today to get instant access to our top analyst recommendations, in-depth research, investing resources, and more. Learn More

Why Waste Management Stock Is in the Dumps Today

• WM missed top- and bottom-line expectations for the quarter.
• The company used pricing power to drive revenue gains, but volumes are a worrisome sign.
• WM is a long-term winner, but the next few quarters are full of uncertainty.
• Motley Fool Issues Rare “All In” Buy Alert

Waste Management

Quarterly results raise concerns about near-term weakness.

Waste Management ( WM -1.48% ) reported second-quarter results that fell short of Wall Street expectations. Investors are moving on, sending shares of WM down 6% as of 10:45 a.m. ET.

Pricing drives revenue increase

Waste Management, which is rebranding itself as WM, is the nation's largest provider of collection, recycling, and disposal services for residential, industrial, and municipal customers. The company earned $1.69 per share in the second quarter on sales of $5.4 billion, falling short of Wall Street's estimates for $1.83 per share on sales of $5.43 billion.

Revenue was up 5.5%, fueled by a 6.8% increase in core pricing and an uptick in the value of the company's recycled commodities available for sale. Collection and disposal volumes declined by 0.3%.

Post-earnings, WM raised its full-year guidance for adjusted operating earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization ( EBITDA ) and free cash flow by $100 million. WM continues to consolidate the industry, in the quarter closing deals in Long Island, Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona. It also has a deal in place to acquire medical waste specialist Stericycle  for $7.2 billion.

Is WM stock a buy?

The bottom-line numbers disappointed investors, but the quarter was largely business as usual for WM and a reminder of the consistency this business provides. So far in 2024, net cash from operating activities has increased by 21.6% to $2.52 billion and WM is putting that cash to work on expansion.

The issue is that WM is in a cyclical industry: Waste volumes tend to move with economic activity. With that in mind, the downtick in collection and disposal is a worrisome sign. Should that trend continue in the quarters to come it will be hard for WM to rely on pricing power to continue to fuel revenue growth. The added uncertainty that comes with the Stericycle deal is likely also pushing investors to the sidelines.

For long-term investors there is a lot to like about WM, but the near term is full of uncertainty. Those willing to stomach volatility could see this as a buying opportunity.

Lou Whiteman has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Waste Management. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy .

Related Articles

Premium Investing Services

Invest better with The Motley Fool. Get stock recommendations, portfolio guidance, and more from The Motley Fool's premium services.

Improper waste disposal: Group raises alarm over possible disease outbreak in Kogi

The Renaissance Care and Empowerment Foundation, RECEF, has expressed deep concern about the deteriorating state of cleanliness and waste management in Kogi State, particularly in Lokoja, the state capital.

In a statement sent to DAILY POST on Friday, the Executive Director of RECEF, Idris Ozovehe Muraina, noted that despite efforts such as the launch of “Operation Clean the City” earlier this year by the Commissioner for Environment and Ecological Management, the situation has only worsened, putting the health and well-being of residents at risk.

According to Muraina: “The streets from Lokongoma down to the New Market/NATACO axis are now overrun with unremoved waste, turning our once vibrant city into a breeding ground for diseases and environmental hazards.

“In fact, the dumpsite somewhere around the Felele area of Lokoja, close to the Federal University permanent site, is wearing a new, dangerous look. What was once envisioned as “Operation Clean the City” now seems to have transformed into “Operation Prepare for Cholera” as filth continues to accumulate unchecked.

“We are calling on the Honourable Commissioner of Environment and Ecological Management, as well as the management of the Kogi State Waste Management Board, to urgently wake up to their responsibilities and take decisive action to address this pressing issue.

“The current state of affairs is unacceptable and poses a significant threat to public health and the environment. It is imperative that immediate steps are taken to clean up our streets, properly manage waste, and restore the cleanliness and beauty of our city.”

He urged the authorities responsible for waste management in the state to redouble their efforts, implement effective strategies, and engage with relevant stakeholders to tackle this challenge head-on.

He explained that RECEF Nigeria stands ready to support and collaborate with the government and relevant agencies in any way possible to ensure a cleaner, healthier, and more sustainable environment for all residents of Kogi State.

Niger State begins payment of N25bn to pensioners

You may like

SDP suspends embattled Kogi chairman for alleged anti-party activities

Economic Hardship: Kogi youths distance themselves from planned nationwide protests

I remain SDP chairman in Kogi – Oricha knocks NWC over Caretaker Committee

Veterinary doctors demand payment of accumulated arrears in Kogi

SDP dissolves State Working Committee in Kogi

LG Autonomy: Gov Ododo plotting to circumvent Supreme Court ruling in Kogi – PDP alleges

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

The White House Has a Plan to Slash Plastic Use in the U.S.

The government said it would phase out its purchases of single-use plastics, a significant step because it is the biggest buyer of consumer goods in the world.

By Hiroko Tabuchi

Calling plastic pollution one of the world’s most pressing environmental problems, the Biden administration on Friday said that the federal government, the biggest buyer of consumer goods in the world, would phase out purchases of single-use plastics.

The administration also said it planned tougher regulations on plastic manufacturing, which releases planet-warming greenhouse gases and other dangerous pollutants.

The efforts, which the White House called the first comprehensive strategy to tackle plastic use nationwide, aim to reduce demand for disposable plastic items while also helping to create a market for substitutes that are reusable, compostable or more easily recyclable.

Brenda Mallory, who heads the White House Council on Environmental Quality, said in a statement that the changes would “require unprecedented action at every stage of the plastic life cycle.” Because of its purchasing power, the White House added, “the federal government has the potential to significantly impact the supply of these products.”

The emphasis on curbing plastic use mirrors a growing recognition that the world can’t recycle or manage its way out of a deluge of plastic waste. Global plastic production rose nearly 230-fold between 1950 and 2019, to more than 400 million tons a year , and is expected to quadruple from current levels by 2050 . An estimated 40 percent of that is single-use plastic, which makes up the bulk of the world’s plastic waste.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

• Transcripts

Waste Management, Inc. (WM) Q2 2024 Earnings Call Transcript

Waste Management, Inc. ( NYSE: WM ) Q2 2024 Earnings Conference Call July 25, 2024 10:00 AM ET

Company Participants

Ed Egl - Senior Director, IR Jim Fish - President and CEO John Morris - EVP and COO Devina Rankin - EVP and CFO Tara Hemmer - SVP and CSO

Conference Call Participants

Tyler Brown - Raymond James Hilary Leon - Morgan Stanley Jerry Revich - Goldman Sachs Noah Kaye - Oppenheimer Bryan Burgmeier - Citi Kevin Chen - CIBC James Schumm - TD Cowen Stephanie Moore - Jefferies Brian Butler - Stifel Sabahat Khan - RBC

Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to WM's Second Quarter 2024 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are on a listen-only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there will be a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions]. Please note that today's conference is being recorded.

I will now hand the conference over to speaker host, Ed Egl, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Livia. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us for our second quarter 2024 earnings conference call. With me this morning are Jim Fish, President and Chief Executive Officer, John Morris, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, and Devina Rankin, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.

You will hear prepared comments from each of them today. Jim will cover high-level financials and provide a strategic update. John will cover an operating overview, and Devina will cover the details of the financials.

Before we get started, please note that we have filed a Form 8K that includes the earnings press release and is available on our website at www.wm.com. In addition, we have published a supplemental presentation with additional information elaborating on the strategic rationale for the company's planned acquisition of Stericycle. The supplemental presentation is available on our website at investors.wm.com and as an exhibit to the Form 8K. The Form 8K, the press release, and the schedule for the press release include important information. During the call, you will hear forward-looking statements, which are based on current expectations, projections, or opinions about future periods. All forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially.

Some of these risks and uncertainties are discussed in today's press release and in our filings with the SEC, including our most recent Form 10K and Form 10Qs. John will discuss our results in the areas of yield and volume, which, unless stated otherwise, are more specifically references to internal revenue growth or IRG from yield or volume. During the call, Jim, John, and Devina will discuss operating EBITDA, which is income from operations before depreciation and amortization.

Any comparisons, unless otherwise stated, will be with the prior year. Net income, EPS, income from operations and margin, operating EBITDA and margin, and SG&A expense and margin results have been adjusted to enhance comparability by excluding certain items that management believes do not reflect our fundamental business performance or results of operations.

These adjusted measures, in addition to free cash flow or non-GAAP measures, please refer to the earnings press release and tables, which can be found on the company's website at www.wm.com, for reconciliations to the most comparable GAAP measures and additional information about our use of non-GAAP measures and non-GAAP projections. This call is being recorded and will be available 24 hours a day, beginning approximately 1 p.m. Eastern time today. To hear a replay of the call, access the WM website at www.investors.wm.com. Time-sensitive information provided during today's call, which is occurring on July 25, 2024, may no longer be accurate at the time of a replay. Any redistribution, retransmission, or rebroadcast of this call in any form without the express written consent of WM is prohibited.

Now I'll turn the call over to WM's President and CEO, Jim Fish.

Okay, thanks, Ed, and thanks for joining us. Our results for the quarter were fueled by strong operating performance in the collection and disposal business. We once again achieved double-digit operating EBITDA growth in the second quarter, keeping us on pace to achieve the full-year outlook that we provided last quarter.

Quarterly operating EBITDA margin reached 30% for the first time in the company's history, driven by operating efficiencies from technology investments and the sustained effectiveness of our pricing strategy. We're pleased with our performance in the first half of 2024 and are well-positioned to deliver another year of strong financial results. Our team's executing very well on our strategic priorities, as evidenced by the expected growth in operating EBITDA, approaching 10% for the full year.

A big part of our strategic approach to growth is to find future opportunities where we can leverage our own expertise, whether it's using technology to improve our routing efficiencies, turning landfill gas into renewable natural gas, or automating recycling plants to drive greater throughput and lower operating costs. Each of these recognizes a future need and capitalizes on it. And now our recently announced agreement to acquire Stericycle presents another opportunity to leverage our expertise to drive higher growth.

Stericycle has a leading position in the growing medical waste industry. The planned acquisition adds complementary business platforms to further our leading suite of comprehensive waste and environmental solutions. And these strategic benefits are accompanied by attractive financial benefits. Our team is progressing through the regulatory approval process and integration planning, and we're excited to welcome Stericycle's team members to WM.

Even as we add medical waste as a new vertical within our business to complement our existing collection and disposal business, we continue to position our solid waste network for future growth. As we've said, the pipeline for solid waste tuck-in acquisition opportunities was strong coming into 2024. Our teams worked hard to move tuck-in acquisitions to completion, and we've now closed more than $750 million of solid waste acquisitions through July. These transactions strengthen our core collection and disposal operations in North America in new geographies like Long Island, New York, and complement existing operations through tuck-in acquisitions in growth markets in Florida, North Carolina, and Arizona. We also continue to execute well on sustainability, our sustainability growth investments.

We expect to bring five new renewable natural gas projects online in 2024, adding to the two new facilities completed in 2022 and 2023. We have another nine projects in active construction, with construction beginning or expected to begin on the remaining four facilities later this year. Momentum is building, and we're excited about the progress we're making.

Investing directly in building our renewable natural gas platform meets all of our investment criteria. We're driving strong returns with expected payback periods of three years or four years at better multiples than traditional M&A. Plus, we're expanding environmental benefits by collecting and beneficially using more landfill gas, and we're strengthening our core business by positioning our landfill assets as community energy partners.

Looking forward, we're exploring the scale of opportunity in future project development, and growth from our renewable energy business across our landfill network. At the same time, we continue to maximize the value of the renewable energy we produce through a balanced marketing strategy that leverages the transportation and voluntary markets to secure returns, reduce risk, and manage volatility. These efforts demonstrate our commitment to scaling this unique growth opportunity to create long-term value for the environment and shareholders alike.

Turning to recycling our investments and automating our existing facilities and building capacity in new markets is helping differentiate WM with customers, unlocking new opportunities to further expand our network, such as recent successes in Ontario. At the same time, our automation investments are providing consistent financial results, improving labor costs per ton by 30% to 35%, and increasing the blended value on commodity sales by 15% to 20%.

We completed our Pittsburgh and Atlanta automation projects during the second quarter, and both facilities ramped up quickly. We're on track to complete another seven automation projects and add new facilities in New York, Florida, and Portland by year-end.

Our progress to date increases our capacity from our recycling investments by more than a 1 million tons. The WM story is one of delivering on our commitments. We achieved strong results in the first half of 2024, and are positioned to continue that trajectory during the balance of the year. As we kick off our planning process for next year, we have some early enthusiasm about 2025. Based on all the opportunities we discussed today, we're particularly bullish on the long-term. It's our dedicated team that makes all of this possible, and I want to thank them for all of their contributions.

And I'll now turn the call over to John to discuss our operational results.

John Morris

Thanks, Jim, and good morning. We're pleased with our second quarter results, particularly our ongoing optimization of operating costs. Our teams remain intently focused on delivering safe and reliable service to our customers, and I want to thank them for their dedication, especially those in areas impacted by Hurricane Beryl in early July.

Second quarter operating expenses is a percentage of revenue improved by 130 basis points year-over-year to 60.9%. This improvement is a testament to our disciplined management of operating costs and our collection lines of business. Combining our strong operating expense performance with disciplined pricing, we significantly enhanced overall operating EBITDA margins. In the second quarter, operating EBITDA in our collection and disposal business grew by $203 million, with margin expanding to 37.3%.

Our continued adoption of technology and automation was a key driver of these significant operating cost improvements. Specifically, in labor, the use of scheduling and planning tools, advanced mapping technology, expansion of our dynamic routing capabilities, and automation of our residential fleet resulted in improved efficiency across all three of our collection lines of business for the second consecutive quarter. In residential, efficiency improved by nearly 6% in Q2, largely due to fleet automation. Our automated routes achieved over 30% efficiency improvement, contributing to a significant increase in residential operating EBITDA margin when compared to last year.

Additionally, our people-first focus led to reduced driver turnover, which improved 300 basis points from a year ago. Company-wide, the integration of technology and improved driver retention contributed to a 90 basis point reduction in labor costs as a percentage of revenue. We remain confident in the value of our technology and optimization efforts, and we expect to continue driving labor cost improvements throughout the year.

Turning to other operating costs, repair and maintenance spending as a percentage of revenue improved by 20 basis points, reflecting our continued adoption of technology-enabled processes and an improving truck delivery schedule. Lower fuel costs also contributed 20 basis point improvement to operating expenses as a percentage of revenue. We remain committed to optimizing our cost structure to meet both operational and financial objectives, and we're proud of the results we have achieved so far.

And finally, turning to revenue growth, our customer lifetime value model continued to drive organic revenue growth from price in line with our full year expectations. Our pricing results relative to plan remain on track, reflecting our team's focus on using customer-specific data and insights to deliver price increases that keep pace with inflation and margin expansion objectives. Churn remains at 9%, and service increases continue to outpace decreases, further reinforcing our execution.

On the volume front, trends in commercial collection, MSW, and special waste remain strong in the quarter and are generally aligned with expectations. As are C&D landfill volumes when adjusted for the lapping of volumes related to Hurricane Ian cleanup last year. However, volume in our roll-off line of business is one area where we continue to see a bit of softness.

Similar to last quarter, we continue to see moderation in both a temporary business driven by home building, as well as a portion of our permanent roll-off business in the industrial segment. While a few segments of our collection volume are trending a bit behind our full year expectations, our discipline revenue management combined with our strong execution on cost optimization continue to give us ample confidence that we are positioned to deliver strong financial performance throughout the rest of the year.

In closing, I want to thank the entire WM team again for their contributions. Their performance so far in 2024 sets us up for continued success.

I'll now turn the call over to Devina to discuss our second quarter financial results in further detail.

Devina Rankin

Thanks, John, and good morning. We're pleased with the strong start to 2024, particularly when we focus on the three most important financial measures we track, operating EBITDA, operating EBITDA margin, and free cash flow. Starting with operating EBITDA, through the first six months, we have seen this metric grow more than 12%, with all of this growth being organic.

This puts us on track to deliver our full year outlook of nearly 10% operating EBITDA growth, well above our long-range annual target of 5% to 7%. As a reminder, in setting our operating EBITDA target for 2024 and then quickly increasing it by $100 million in April, we projected that achieving this year's outsized growth would be driven by two things. The first is the benefits of price and cost optimization in the collection and disposal business, which we expected to be weighted toward the first half of the year.

And the second is incremental earnings contributions from our investments in growing our recycling and renewable energy businesses, which would be weighted toward the back half of the year. This is exactly how 2024 is tracking, giving us confidence in meeting or exceeding the midpoint of our guidance range for operating EBITDA, with our current projection being $6.475 billion. This includes about $20 million to $30 million of incremental growth from tech-in solid waste acquisitions in 2024.

Turning now to operating EBITDA margin, it's worth highlighting again that at 30%, Q2 is the best quarterly operating EBITDA margin result in our company's history. In the second quarter, total company operating EBITDA margin expanded 130 basis points, and this was driven by about 200 basis points of margin expansion from price and cost optimization efforts in the collection and disposal business, and then a benefit from the sale of non-strategic assets of about 50 basis points. These strong margin results were partially offset by higher risk management costs, an increase in incentive compensation costs, and a modest drag from the net impact of recycled commodity prices and fuel.

The key takeaway from looking at these puts and takes is that we saw a 200 basis point lift in our core business versus last year, and we see the benefits of employee retention, truck deliveries, and the use of technology and process to optimize the business that started in the second half of 2023 holding. The significant margin expansion in operating EBITDA growth in 2024 is delivering robust operating and free cash flow growth.

Through the first six months of 2024, we've generated cash flow from operations of $2.52 billion, and that's an increase of nearly $450 million or 22% compared to the same period in 2023. Our double-digit operating EBITDA growth, favorable working capital trends, and lower cash incentive compensation payments are driving this strong performance. For the first half of the year, capital expenditures to support the business totaled $947 million. Sustainability growth investments were about $388 million.

Both are tracking a plan that we anticipate spending at or slightly above the high end of our prior guidance of between $850 million and $900 million for sustainability growth investments in 2024. Pulling this all together, we've generated $1.24 billion of free cash flow in the first six months of the year, and we're confident that we will achieve our guidance range of between $2 billion and $2.15 billion of free cash flow in 2024. As Jim mentioned, we've closed more than $750 million in Truck-In acquisitions through July, and we look forward to closing the acquisition of Stericycle as early as the fourth quarter of this year.

Given our elevated M&A activity, we want to reiterate our capital allocation priorities and emphasize our commitment to a strong balance sheet. WM has a disciplined approach to allocating capital to strategic growth opportunities, including the capital needed to sustain and grow our core solid waste businesses and investments that we're making to grow our recycling and renewable energy assets. We prioritize return on invested capital in making these decisions, and we expect all of our investments to provide healthy returns above our cost of capital.

We also remain committed to growing shareholder returns, which includes increasing the dividend as free cash flow grows. We intend to finance the Stericycle transaction using a combination of bank debt and senior notes. When combining the impacts of the $750 million of solid waste Tuck-In acquisitions with the funding of Stericycle, we now expect our leverage to be about 3.6 times post-close.

In light of this elevated leverage, we're temporarily suspending our share repurchase program so that we can work our way back through our targeted leverage range of 2.75 times to 3 times, about 24 months after the close of Stericycle. The slight revisions in our projected leverage figures since our announcement of the planned acquisition of Stericycle are updates that reflect the impact of layering on the additional Tuck-In acquisition activity this year.

We're steadfast in our commitment to debt investors and rating agencies because we know the value of our strong investment grade credit profile. To wrap up, we're very pleased with our strong results, and I know the WM team remains hard at work to deliver on all of our goals for 2024.

With that, Livia, let's open the line for questions.

Question-and-Answer Session

Certainly. [Operator Instructions]. And our first question coming from the line of Tyler Brown from Raymond James.

Tyler Brown

Hey, good morning.

Good morning.

Hey, Devina, so obviously, solid quarter great start to the year. I think last call you mentioned north of 30% margins in Q2, possibly north of 31% in Q3. Looks like Q2 came in more around 30%. I just wanted to see if that north of 31% is still a good placeholder, or should we maybe think about moving that down a smidge?

So, I'll start by highlighting that the one item that was different than our expectations at the end of April when we spoke about that little north of 30% for Q2 is the risk management impact of 50 basis points in the quarter. So, if we had not had that item, which we couldn't have predicted, we would have come in at or above the target that I provided on the call last time. What I would say about when we look forward to Q3, what's changed a little bit, there's a couple of things.

One is recycled commodity prices, and you guys know that we have a different geography than our competitors do with regard to the impact of recycled commodity prices. And that was a 40 basis point headwind in the quarter, and we expect elevated commodity prices to continue into the back half of the year. So, there is a little bit of a headwind that we weren't projecting from recycling brokerage in particular that would carry over.

And then, in addition to that, with lower industrial volumes that John mentioned, the flow through on industrial volumes is generally strong 40% levels. And so, that again is one of the things that created a headwind in the quarter and that would impact Q3. The third item relates to the tuck-in acquisition contributions. As you know, based on where we are in integration processes, integrated M&A revenue and activity tends to come in in early innings at a lower contribution margin than our base business. So, what I would say is that right now our Q3 outlook is in the range of 30.5% to 31% with all those things taken into account.

Yes, quite a few things. Okay, perfect. And then, as we think about EBITDA dollars, so I just want to make sure I understand some of the moving pieces to the guidance. So, because I believe at the end of Q1 you had only spent like maybe $10 million on acquisitions. You mentioned $750 million through July. I would have thought that that would have - obviously including Winters Bros, so I would have thought that would have helped maybe the guidance. I assume there's some EBITDA associated with that.

So, I guess one, can you talk about what the end year revenue contribution from M&A should be in '24? And then, can you just talk about, maybe some of the puts and takes? Because, again, I would have thought there would have been some EBITDA contributions there. Maybe there's something. You mentioned a few things breaking against you.

Yeah, Tyler, it's John. Good question. I mean, if you look at what we did in Q2, it was about $77 million of revenue that was acquired. The $750 that we put, that we've all talked about, represents about $300 million of acquired revenue by the end of the year. So, hopefully that clarifies a little bit. And then, what Devina and I talked about is there is some benefit we've talked about in the back half of the year, that $25-ish million that will be a contribution from some of the M&A we've referenced.

So, in terms of overall EBITDA growth for the year, what I would say is, when we look at the first half of the year, right, the first half of the year, Solid Waste EBITDA has grown $415 million, quite remarkable. The headwind that I talked about in risk management, it shows up in the corporate and other category. And so, what you see is, there was more of an offset to that Solid Waste growth in the first -- in the second quarter than what we experienced in the first quarter. But the sustainability businesses, we still expect to be on track to generate that $115 million of EBITDA contribution to the year. And when we think about what happened over the second quarter that may not be showing up as a direct increase in that amount, it really is a put-and-take story.

One is the value, the incremental value we expect from higher commodity prices in the recycling business, partially offset by the impact of a slowdown in some of the construction projects on the renewable energy business. Now, we're talking weeks, not months here, right? This is contributions that we now expect to start to ramp more in the fourth quarter than what we were expecting earlier in the second half of the year.

So, all-in-all, what I would tell you is the EBITDA growth story for us is approaching 10% in the year, and still most of that coming from the solid waste business, with the contributions coming from the sustainability business, in total tracking according to plan, though there was a put-and-take.

So, Tyler, Jim here, let me just give you a little bit of extra color here. The 25 that Devina referenced in kind of our forecast over the revised guidance number of 6,450 that we gave last quarter, that 25 has some of what John talked about, which is the Winter Bros acquisition. We'll get five months-ish of that. We already had baked into our original guidance some M&A EBITDA and revenue, but can't say we baked in Winter Bros. So, you're going to get part of that. You're going to get, as Devina said, you're going to get some of the sustainability stuff, which, by the way, is working both ways for us.

I mean, we get some commodity pickup. We also are seeing a few minor delays in a couple of the R&G plants. We're still building five R&G plants for the year, as we said we would, but 30 days or so of delay is impacting us. So, all of that adds up to the 25. I think Devina's point, though, is really worth really reiterating here. I mean, you're talking about almost 10% EBITDA growth, and to some degree, I feel like we have a great story to tell, and sometimes we aren't great storytellers, because I feel like we've got 10%, which is the strongest EBITDA growth, probably back to the 1990s.

I'm sure the company grew by more than 10% in 1982, but since the 1990s, that's the strongest EBITDA growth we've ever seen, and yet we're doing it. You remember in 2019, when we said we grew EBITDA between 5% and 7%, we said, at the top end of the range, that's going to be in a really robust economy, where we're seeing 2-plus percent volume growth. We're not seeing 2-plus percent volume growth. We're flat on volume. And yet, in an economy that's kind of stumbling along, honestly, and yet we're growing EBITDA by 10%, almost all of that, except for that $25 million-ish or whatever that number is for us, almost all that's coming from organic growth. Same with last year.

We grew by 7% last year, and it was almost all organic growth. It's coming from those things that we've talked about in the past. You remember a couple years ago, we started talking about technology, probably five years ago. We're going to talk, we're going to bring technology to bear, and we're going to really make a commitment to sustainability, and we're going to put operating processes in place, improve efficiencies, we're going to get smarter with pricing through data analytics, all that stuff. And I remember on the earnings call getting questions like, “Okay, that's great, Jim. When are we going to see the impact on the bottom line?” You are seeing the impact on the bottom line.

When you see 10% EBITDA growth, 160 basis points of margin growth, and still 5-ish percent revenue growth, it's all coming from price, you are absolutely seeing that kind of strategic growth, and then at the same time, we're doing some acquisitions. I mentioned in my script where we're filling holes, either where we weren't before, or adding to really strong strategic positions like Texas, like Florida, like North Carolina, Tennessee, you could go down the list, Arizona, and then you've all seen a deck on Stericycle. I mean, Stericycle is basically a fourth line of business for us.

We've got resi, we've got commercial, we've got industrial, now we've got medical. And with Stericycle comes significant opportunities for synergy and comes with a higher growth trajectory in medical waste than in the solid waste space. So we're very excited about that, which basically gets me to a 25 number, and 2025 we'll give you guidance in February. But I could not be more bullish when I think about 2025, when you add all those things up. I mean, think about these sustainability investments.

Tara will tell you we've spent probably three-quarters of the capital, or we will have by the end of the year, and we will have only realized 15% of the EBITDA. So 2025, I don't care who gets elected in November. Well, I do, but it doesn't matter who gets elected in November. And it doesn't matter whether we have geopolitical problems. It doesn't matter whether the economy is up or down. We're going to have a blockbuster year in 2025.

We'll talk about it in February. But that's on top of what we consider to be a blockbuster year this year. So a bit longer answer than I think you were bargaining for when you got on when you were first in the queue. But I just want to make sure everybody understands all that.

[Indiscernible]. It's great. I really appreciate it. I don't mean to split hairs too much, but we're kind of in that business. But I appreciate the call. Thank you.

Thank you. And our next question coming from the line of Toni Kaplan from Morgan Stanley. Your line is open.

Hilary Leon

Hi, this is Hilary Leon for Toni Kaplan. Good morning, guys. Great quarter. So speaking of the election, sorry to bring it up, but we've had a couple number of inquiries surrounding potential implications of it. Depending on who's elected or who's in the House, how would you expect R&G and RINs to be affected or if at all? And what sort of increase, decrease do you see potentially in your R&G projects?

Tara Hemmer

Sure, I'll answer that one. We've been obviously tracking this very closely. And I think what's important to note related to our R&G business is we're in a very different time than we were in the previous Trump administration. You've really seen a lot more development on plants. We've seen the voluntary market really shore up. And we also have the RVO that is in place through 2025.

So if you look at analysts that really cover the R&G industry, by any measure, most are saying that they don't expect a significant decrease in RIN pricing really more solidly in that 250 range in a potential Trump presidency. And as you know, that is well above our investment thesis of $26 per MMBTU.

So, Toni, real quickly, you know, Tara did a great job of answering that and she's absolutely right. I would just tell you, we've always said, no matter who's in office, we're pretty agnostic about that. I mean, we all have our own personal preferences, but the business itself does really well in just about any regulatory environment, short of somebody coming in and saying, you know, landfills are closed all tomorrow morning. But short of that, we are pretty agnostic with respect to regulation, whether it's the Chevron doctrine, whatever it is, we do well in just about any environment.

Got it. Great. Appreciate the color. And just a minor question. So, you know, with Hurricane Beryl happening recently, do you expect any sort of volume impact or top line growth impact, or is that not really significant?

It's insignificant. We had our quarterly business reviews with the Texas market, who was hit the hardest, and they've made projections. But at this point, it's not expected to be material.

It wasn't insignificant to my heart [ph]

Yeah. We all felt more significant within the business world.

It was more significant at my house, but as far as the business, it's not going to be material.

Got it. All right. That's it for me. Thanks, guys. Great quarter.

Thank you. And our next question coming from the line of Jerry Revich from Goldman Sachs. Your line is open.

Jerry Revich

Yes, hi. Thank you. Good morning, everyone.

Good morning, Jerry.

Jim, on Stericycle, you know, I'm wondering if you just weigh in because historically, the company has really struggled to push pricing. And I think that's been because of the autoclave business. And you folks in your businesses are obviously leaders in driving pricing and return. So I'm wondering if you could just maybe peel back the onion on your strategy for that business and how you folks can have an impact on pricing discipline in the market through your ownership.

Yeah, Jerry, it's a little hard to tell at this point. One thing I can tell you is that Stericycle has talked a lot about the fact that as they roll out new systems that those systems will give them better visibility. And boy, we absolutely concur with that. I mean, you know, we like the fact that our systems give us a lot of visibility all the way down at the customer level. So we don't really know what that means in terms of pricing at this point because we haven't had a chance to kind of stick our head under the covers. But we do know that the better the visibility, the smarter you can be with data and analytics and with pricing.

And in terms of the volume outlook, you know, I think historically the industry has had a much tougher volume result than what the forecast is going forward. Can you just talk about what's driving inflection in your view? And sorry, this is still on medical waste.

Yeah, you know, I mean, I think this is really kind of an outsider looking in because, again, we're not, you know, we don't own the business yet. And we really, for the most part, are looking at public documents. We're starting to go through an integration process where we get to look at some things. But I would tell you that if we look at kind of the medical industry, not just medical waste but medical services, and as you look at the United States or you look at Canada or you look at just about any country, the U.K., France, Germany, I mean, all those countries are getting older. And so that would seem to be a positive for the volume of services in that industry.

And commensurate with that, you would expect to see medical waste increase at a similar pace. So why their volumes have been a bit slower than expected, it's hard for me to say. But I sure do look at the future of this and say, this is a business that should have a very strong volume trajectory to it. I do think it will be helpful as we start to look at their customer base. They have a lot of customers that are moving towards kind of larger national account-type customers. And we're very good at national accounts. Our national accounts business has really been a driver of our growth over the last kind of five years to ten years.

So as you look at their business that's going, in large part, from these small-quantity generators to more large-quantity generators, the UNHs and the HCAs and companies like that, I think that's right in our wheelhouse.

Super. And can I ask one more, Devina? In terms of the risk management costs in the quarter, can you just expand on those, you know, or how much of that is non-recurring out of period versus what might linger with us? It looks like based on the sequential outlook for margins and 3Q, it feels like you're applying normal seasonality to this lower base in 2Q that includes the headwind from the risk costs. So I'm wondering if you could just expand on that, if you don't mind.

Sure. So in terms of what we experienced in the second quarter, you know, this is a business where we say safety is priority one and getting our team members home safe every day is the most important job that we all do. And I would tell you that, unfortunately, there were some incidents in the second quarter that resulted in reserves associated with some of the, you know, more significant incidences that we can, from time-to-time, incur in our business. It is not representative of long-term trends. It is not representative of something that we expect to repeat. So I would say non-recurring, not out of period.

What I would say with regard to the seasonal trends, and I mentioned this when Tyler and I were talking about margins as well, is what's difficult about typical seasonal trends for us is that roll-off is really a big piece of what can drive seasonal trends upward. And we did not see the roll-off volume pickup that we would have expected to see, and we are cautious about that going into the third quarter. Aside from that, we do expect the traditional benefits that you get from higher MSW levels and the commercial collection line of business in particular continues to be really, really strong in terms of both volume growth, price execution, and really strong flow-through from those efficiency gains that we've had.

So overall, seasonality expectations are very strong, and we expect that to continue with the exception of the muted roll-off impact.

I appreciate it. Thank you.

Our next question coming from the line of Noah Kaye from Oppenheimer. Your line is open.

Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking the questions and not trying to turn this into a stair cycle deal call, of course, but I just want to ask you one or two quick questions there, and thanks for the deck. The $125 million or greater cost synergies you're, again, referencing, just help us understand what the expected timeline is for realizing those? You talked about run rates. Is this basically something that you get to a run rate on at some point in 2025? Is it earlier in the year? Is it later in the year? How are you thinking about it currently?

Yeah, so it's a good question, Noah. You know, Rafa Carrasco, our officer here, is going to be running this for us, and Rafa is kind of right into the process of looking at what do the synergies look like for this deal. We said $125 at the start. We didn't really give kind of a breakdown of when we realized those. Some of those, obviously, you know you get up front, whether it is some internalization benefits on the disposal side. It's also, you know, some of the SG&A piece.

But we do think that, as we said kind of early on, that the $125 is, you know, you can do some math to get to a point where you say that's pretty conservative, even if you're just looking at the SG&A line. We built in 300 basis points on the SG&A line, and their guidance for the year was 22% SG&A as a percent of revenue. And you know where ours is. I mean, we're at 9%. And by the way, as I think Davina said a couple of times, you probably should compare them not to the 9% but to what our areas run at. Our areas run at like 5%.

So you can do some math and get to a much bigger number than 125, but that's what Rafa and his team are doing right now is determining, all right, what do the synergies look like? What comprises the $125? Is the $125 twice as big as that? I mean, what is that number? And then to your point, when do we get it? Is it, you know, we've kind of said three years to get there, but you may have most of it coming in year one. You may have most of it coming in year two. We don't quite know yet. That's where he's digging in. We will give quite a bit more color on this. First of all, once we own the business, we'll give a lot more color on it. And secondly, we'll give more color and we'll give guidance in February.

So one data point, Noah, that I think is really helpful in terms of thinking about timing and why it would differ from, you know, the timeline that we saw on ADS as an example is that when you think about Stericycle and where they are in their journey, they are just completing their ERP implementation, and we think that there's reason to be cautious with respect to the pace at which we could capture synergies with this business. And Jim did a great job of articulating, you know, some of the work that's going on right now in order for us to be able to fortify our expectations and outlook.

But I think that the ERP implementation journey that the Stericycle team has been on is one of the reasons that we're not at a position that we can speak to how quickly we can get there, although you know us well enough to know that we're going to move as fast as we can.

Yeah, I think that those are both very fair points and well noted on the SG&A gap. That's something we look forward to hearing more about. A minor housekeeping question. It looked like in the investing line there was an outflow of roughly $800 million in other. What was that?

Yeah, so it was about $775 million of unusual activity, and it will be disclosed specifically in the 10Q. But basically because of with the lead up to the announcement of the Stericycle acquisition, we were in a period where we had material non-public information, and we could not remarket our tax-exempt bonds to the marketplace. So we had to repurchase our own tax-exempt bonds for a short period of time.

That's what that relates to. We've since already successfully remarketed the ones that have been in place or that could have gone back to the market through July, and then we have additional remarketing activity that will happen in the third quarters and fourth quarters where we expect to fully place those back into the marketplace by the end of the year.

Okay. Thank you for that. And I guess just one high-level overarching question on the business. I think it speaks to, Jim, what you got into before around the outlook. Organically, you're still continuing to deliver growth. You're seeing this kind of price-cost spread continue. The market seems to be somewhat soft volume-wise around parts of the economy, industrial. How's the strength of the consumer, and what's your view into being able to continue to get a healthy level of price and an outside spread to your cost as we get into $25 million?

Yeah, that's a great question. And I think the consumer has been pretty resilient through all of this, through COVID, through kind of the rebound, and through a bit of a -- look, it's not been a bad economy, but it just hasn't been a -- it certainly hasn't been a blockbuster economy. The consumer has been very resilient, and that's been the encouraging part.

I think it shows up when you look at our kind of more small and medium businesses, which are reflected in our commercial. You know, the commercial line of business has been fairly strong for us on the volume side. Resi has been soft, but Resi is not really driven by consumer behavior. Resi has really been driven by John Morris, and John's been really working on improving margins in that line of business.

The real softness has been in that temp roll-off, more industrial space. You know, if you look at our numbers, C&D has been soft, but a lot of that is just difficult comps because of the big Florida hurricane last year. Special waste has been pretty good. MSW has been quite good. So we're actually not that disappointed with flat volume, but it's just not the 2% to 3% that we kind of talked about, you know, in 2019 at the last investor day. I would tell you that the consumer seems to be resilient, seems to be fairly strong, so all of that's good for us.

Thank you very much.

One last quick point here when you talk about Stericycle. We really haven't talked that much about the operating side of this, but look, I think there's a real opportunity on the operating side. John's talked a lot about the efficiencies that we're bringing in the solid waste space, the technology that we're bringing to bear. All of that has application in the medical waste space, too, because they really run trucks the same way we run trucks.

Yep. Yep, well taken. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question coming from the line of Bryan Burgmeier from Citi. Your line is open.

Bryan Burgmeier

Good morning. Thank you for taking the question. Just a couple of housekeeping items. So maybe just following up on Jerry's question. It sounds like the risk management margin headwind is going to roll off at the end of 3Q, if that's correct. And then can you provide any clarity on the tax rate for 2024? The 1Q, I think, was in the high teens, and it kind of moved into the low 20s in 2Q. What do you think we shake out for the remainder of the year?

Yeah, so what I would say is, I would describe the risk management item as a Q2 only item in terms of the magnitude of the 50 basis points headwinds because it was activity-based. It's not something that will be recurring in nature.

With regard to tax rate, this is actually a little more complicated question to answer than you might anticipate. But what I would tell you is when we exited Q2, our projection for that is 22%. I'd clarify for you two important things. One is that it includes $145 million of investment tax credit benefits that we expect for the year. And if there is any change in the timing or place and service dates of our renewable natural gas facilities, you could see that change. But that's our best estimate as of right now.

And then the second item is, there was a change in accounting in 2024 related to our low-income housing tax credit investment, and that actually has a slight impact on the effective tax rate because of a change in geography on the income statement. And Ed and Heather are happy to talk through that with you in more detail if you would like.

Got it. Got it. Thanks for that detail. And just one more kind of housekeeping item is there's a comment in the press release on a small write-down from waste diversion technology. I know it's not exactly material, but just for our own knowledge, what are those investments? I think there was a similar write-down last year? How many of these type of maybe venture capital style investments does WM have out there at the moment? Thank you, and I'll turn it over.

Sure. So I would tell you in terms of the portfolio, this was the largest investment of its kind that was remaining in our what you call venture capital type suite of investments. So there's not anything significant that I would tell you is looming here for similar investments. For this one in particular, it relates to the continuous investment that we had made, and you'll recall that this was all about looking for opportunities to divert MSW and see what we could do to create sustainable solutions for MSW. We continue to be focused on ensuring that we are thoughtful about what opportunities exist in the marketplace, and we were optimistic about this one, but the viability of it proved to be different than our initial expectations.

Thank you. And our next question coming from the line of Kevin Chen from CIBC. Your line is open.

Hi. Good morning, everyone. Maybe just a few questions here on the Winter Bros acquisition. Just wondering strategically, if you could just walk me through. It looks like they have some waste-to-rail assets. Just wondering if that creates a platform for other opportunities for you. I think they were also a carter for an operator in New York City as part of these commercial zones. Does that do something? And then I know it's a multi-part question here, but I guess the third part would be it looks like they also have some shredding services. I'm just wondering how that plays into your proposed acquisition of Stericycle and its shredded assets. Thank you.

Well, I'll start backwards, Kevin. I think with respect to New York City, we've been a long-term licensed Operator in New York City since the mid-'90s. So that's not the reason why Winter Bros was attracted to us. They're certainly the premier environmental service provider on Long Island. I think you hit on a couple of key things. One, it's a white space for us. It was sort of new real estate. It's not a secret that the Long Island market has got some disposal constraints that are growing at the end of this year with the planned closure of Brookhaven Landfill. They've got intermodal assets and capabilities that play very well into our network capabilities.

And on top of that, the business runs really well standalone. So for us, we're really fortunate to have those folks join the WM team. They run about 150 routes out there. It's about 500 employees. So we're excited about that. In terms of the commercial waste zone thing, we've obviously followed it like a lot of other folks, but that was not reasonable for our interest in Winter Bros.

Okay. And just maybe a clarification, just those intermodal assets, does that create a platform for future? I mean, I know you have a lot on your plate now, just kind of thinking further out, or is that primarily something you'd use for kind of internalizing waste, diversion -- sorry, go ahead.

Certainly their ability to move waste off of Long Island in modes other than truck transportation was certainly something that was appealing to us, and we view that as, like I said, as some of the disposal constraints continue to grow on Long Island. Their capabilities on Long Island, in addition to the network of assets we have that can receive intermodal waste, was a key contributor in terms of the strategic outlook for us acquiring that business.

Perfect. That's it for me. Best of luck in the back half of this year.

Thank you. And our next question, coming from the line of James Schumm from TD Cowen. Your line is open.

James Schumm

Hey, thanks for taking my questions. Just curious on the landfill revenues are sort of just up modestly, look like the tons were mostly flat. It's just curious what you're seeing in pricing trends for landfills?

I think, you know, we talked earlier about C&D is actually positive net of the lapping of the, and the volume's continued to be strong. If you're talking about the yield spread clearly there's a little difference in our yield outlook for landfill volume this quarter versus last quarter. But that's really, that was really distinctive and showed up in one of our areas that took on a good chunk of volume, great business, but an average lower rate. And that has more to do with the geography of where the volume came in from.

So we see, in terms of our overall landfill volume, they're still positive. We still see decent trends on the landfill volume side. And if you look at it from a core price standpoint, which is really what we were focused on. If you look at both the landfill and the transfer station core price, you don't see any deviation there. So we're continuing to drive value in terms of the quality of revenue we're bringing into our post collection facilities.

Yeah. James, I just to add a little bit to that, I, what John said there, I mean, sometimes it gets lost, but, but these different geographies have different rates and this happened to be a pretty big pickup about 20% pickup in MSW. And as John said, it was, it was good, very good for this area, but that area happens to have an average rate well below the average rate for the company. And that's driven by market conditions. That's driven by, by capacity competition, all of those things, this area, which picked up this, this nice bump in MSW is well below that market rate.

So when you look at yield, which includes mix, the yield calculation reflects that. That's why John talks about core price because core price takes out the mix effect. Core price is essentially flat. If you look at Q2 of '23 versus Q2 of '24, essentially flat. Well, yield was down a bit and the yield was really mixed related.

And the last thing I would add is, look at our special waste volume that continued to be strong through Q2 as well. Right.

Okay, great. Thank you for that. With, with respect to R&G, there were some news reports out there that I think misled some investors a little bit. There was a report that said you could potentially sell your R&G portfolio for $3 billion. You later said you were offended by that price, which made sense to us because the price would seem way too low, but is there any color you can provide about the strategy going forward with the R&G assets, you know, given the large purchase of Stericycle now?

I'm still offended by that number. I think the way I we'd look at that is as we've said all along, this business is really a natural byproduct of our landfills. It's one that provides significant margin accretion for a strong EBITDA to free cash flow conversion. All of those good things that we like, that we talk about it. And last but certainly not least, it adds to our sustainability focus that we really made, kind of a tenant of our strategy a few years back. So all of those things are really good.

We've said kind of all along, everything is for sale at a price, but I would tell you $3 billion is not that price. In fact, it's a long way from that price. So right now our focus has been those 20 plants. I talked about kind of where we are on those, and, you know, we've got two that are out there, three I guess that are out there, and we'll have another four coming online this year. We're in process of construction on all of those. As I said in kind of my extra comments to Tyler's question, almost three-quarters of that CapEx is going to be spent by the end of the year, and only 15% of the EBITDA will have been realized.

So that's why 2025 and '26 really look like there's going to be a big step up there, not just from R&G, but also the recycling investments. So, again, I know the Reuters article was out there, $3 billion, anything that we own is for sale at the right price. And if somebody threw a gigantic number at us, we would look at it. But for now we're focused on building out the remainder of those 20 plants. Tara has talked about the fact that we've got potential for kind of phase 2, some of these other landfills that are not in that 20. We're evaluating those as well. We're super excited about the R&G business and the recycling rebuilds that we're doing.

Yep. That makes sense. That's clear. Thank you, guys. Appreciate it.

Thank you. And our next question coming from the line of Stephanie Moore from Jefferies. Your line is open.

Stephanie Moore

Hi. Good morning. Thank you. I do want to follow-up on maybe Tyler's question at the beginning, and I don't mean to beat a dead horse here, but I think it's important. You know, and I agree. I think, you know, Jim, you're exactly right. It's certainly a blockbuster year with 10% growth. It's really strong. I think, where we're coming from, and this is probably part of all of our problems is that we're always kind of looking for more or where you could see that kind of incremental EBITDA growth.

And I think, as you alluded to and Tyler alluded to M&A seems to be a little bit better. Commodity dollars are a little bit better. The underlying business is performing well. So I think, what would be helpful is maybe if you could talk through areas where it's been a little bit maybe worse than expected or slightly negative. Obviously, we call that a little on the volume front, but anything else that suggests potentially maybe not as strong as everything else, which clearly, quite frankly firing kind of on all cylinders. So helpful there. Sorry for it's long-winded. Thank you.

No, no, no. It's a good question. Look, there's always ups and downs, puts and takes in the business. There's hardly ever, in fact, there may never be a year where every single thing we look at goes up. And you touched on the one which we've talked about a bit this morning, which is volume. Volume is softer than we expected coming into the year.

We thought it would be approaching 1%. Now it's more flat, but we've offset that. And that's the encouraging part for us is not only have we offset it, but expecting 1% volume growth and 7% -- I think 7.6% was our original guidance on the EBITDA line. And now we're saying, okay, oops, volume is not going to be approaching 1%. It's going to be flat. Oh, but by the way, EBITDA is going to be 10%, approaching 10%.

So while not everything is going in the right direction, and there's a couple of other things. We did mention the fact that some minor delays in some of these plants. They're minor delays, but they're not opening exactly when we said they would open. They're still, you know, the five that we committed to opening in '24 are still going to open in '24, but slightly minor delays. I think the impact of that is about $11 million negative. So that's been a negative force, but in no way, shape, or form does that indicate that we're experiencing long-term delays in these projects where we feel like we're on a really good track for construction of those plants.

So, yeah, you know, there's been a couple of things. One thing that we don't talk about, for example, is the fact that when you rebuild these recycle plants, there's a shutdown cost for that. And by the way, you're shutting down in a really good commodity price environment. So that ends up in kind of a strange way being a pickup for us. As we get into 2025, there won't be as much of a shutdown cost as there was in 2024. But '24, it's why I've kind of tried to pound the table a little bit on how impressive 10% is. We've got some delays that have amounted to call it 11 million bucks. We've got some shutdown costs that are, you know, you're going to have a shutdown cost because you have to shut the plant down in order to retool it. So there are a few negatives out there.

You know, could we have a higher tax rate depending on who gets in office in November? Yes. But really the only thing that to us that looks kind of negative and doesn't seem to have prospects for improvement is that kind of industrial temp roll off business. I'm not sure I see that bouncing back in 2025, but I am. That doesn't mean I'm not incredibly bullish about 2025. I just think we have to offset it just the way we've done this year.

Got it. I'll leave it at that. Thank you so much.

Thank you. And our next question coming from the line of Toby [indiscernible]. Your line is open.

Unidentified Analyst

Thanks. On the acquisition front, I'm wondering if you could kind of look through the lens of the other people that you're speaking with in terms of prospects and what are the pressures they're feeling on the business over the last couple of years? You know, supply chain technology investments and some others have been pressuring them, and perhaps driving them to the table to have dialogues with yourselves and others. How do you see that currently and into next year?

I think Toby, you hit on one of them on a supply chain and we go back to that for a second. But first let's start with labor. I mean, you know, we still see pressure on a lot of those frontline contributing jobs and I'm sure that they're enduring some of the same pressure there. We've been fortunate and had the capacity to really make some big changes in terms of wages and overall comp packages, etc. And you're seeing it show up in our turnover, which reduces training, improves safety, reduces our labor, etc. I'm sure that's one area where they're seeing pressure.

I think there's still a little bit of overhang. You talk to some of these folks on the supply chain side where they've got to recapitalize their fleet or their business. That cost is certainly not getting any cheaper. So those are a few areas we think about when we're seeing some of this activity. But I think Jim really hit on something that was important. I mean, the pipeline is strong.

You know, we're on track probably to finish around a $1billion-plus of tuck in acquisitions. We've got obviously three quarters of that done already, but we've continued to be disciplined and make sure that we're, we're filling in white space or buying assets and companies in areas where we see real growth opportunities. And that's why you hear about Arizona, Texas, the Carolinas, Florida, etc.

I want to dig into something you said, can the labor expense trend and that decelerating growth related to, you know, retention and less training expense, et cetera. Can that momentum continue into next year?

Well, I think I would, I would tell you is, is if you look at our labor trend over the last handful of quarters, it's certainly trended through Q2 and it's a handful of things. It's lower turnover. That leads to some of that labor pressure, easy, right? You're, you're hiring less people. You're training less people. Your efficiency is naturally better with someone who's experienced behind the wheel of a vehicle as is your safety performance.

And that's why you continue to hear us talk about it. And the fact that we're, you know, hovering in the, in the, in the high teens for turnover, not only is that low considering what we were dealing with post COVID, but those are historic lows. So we're going to continue to stay intently focused on that. Cause that is driving the labor benefit.

Well, in addition, sorry, I was just going to say, in addition to what John said there, you know, we, we still have call it 50% of the, the way to go on our conversion from rear load to ASL. And in just about every one of those cases, you have a labor benefit. Well, in every case you have a labor benefit.

In most cases, you have a labor benefit because you don't have a helper on the back of that truck. So that helper comes off, but at the same time you're picking up 30% more homes with an automated side loader versus a rear loader. So in addition to the technology that John and team have brought on board that, that is producing efficiency growth in these lines of business and, and you know, technology driven pickup, you also get this, this pickup when you're shifting from manual collection to automated collection.

So the last point I would make on that is we've talked over the last two-plus years about reducing some of the labor intensity from those frontline individual contributor roles that are getting harder to fill and more expensive. You know, we're closing in on 2000 of those positions that we don't need to fill anymore. And we'll be over 2000, call it 2200 to 2300 by the end of the year. And we're approaching sort of the halfway point of what we projected that we could remove the need for as many as 5,000 of those roles. And those are really frontline contributor roles. And again, it's important.

It's not like we're walking a single person out the door. Those are folks who are not necessarily lined up anymore to come in the front door. And we're finding ways to use technology and automation to, to replace that.

Thank you. And our next question coming from the line of David Manson [ph] from Baird. Your line is open.

Hi, good morning. Thank you for the time. Relative to your strategic intent. For Stericycle, about a third of what you're planning to acquire is document destruction. Could you provide some thoughts on how shredded fits in the WM portfolio?

Yeah. Look, I think the shredded business, we look at that as being complimentary to our own recycling business. It, it wasn't a reason to buy stair cycle, but it certainly wasn't a reason to not buy Stericycle either. I think there, you know, the automation that the terrorists talked about coming into those plants can really be a benefit to the Stericycle business. And by the way, the fact that we're. We're the biggest recycler out there is it matters to size matters in this respect.

So we're able to potentially command a better price that we get paid for our material than might a smaller customer of, of those companies like a stair cycle. We process a lot of paper in addition to other commodities. So, so I think there's a couple of places where we really feel like this is going to where we can bring expertise, but we also bring size, which, which makes a difference on, on potentially on price.

And you made the point earlier, Jim, it's routes and customers. It's worth line of business, got a lot of similarities to what we already do in our three collection lines of business. And that's an opportunity for us to get under the covers here. Once we, once we get to that point.

Yep. Thank you. Best of luck.

Thank you. And our next question coming from the line of Brian Butler from Stifel. Your line is open.

Brian Butler

Hey, thanks for squeezing me in. I'll try to just make it quick. Most of my questions have been answered just on that, that thought about kind of document destruction, Stericycle, you know, as well as the document destruction. There's also a handful of assets internationally. What are your thoughts on the international assets? Is it just going to keep those and run them? Or is that an opportunity for growth that you're looking at? Or, or maybe is that really more of a divestiture scenario?

So, as Jim said on the document destruction side, you know, it certainly wasn't the reason to buy Stericycle, but it's also not something that we're looking at from a divestiture perspective. I would tell you that when we think about the, the role that their international footprint can play for WM, we've always been intentional about keeping our eye on the U.K. in particular, with respect to traction that they get from a sustainability and recycling perspective. And we've done that more from afar. And this gives us a more active position in an important market to be sure that we're keeping pace with sustainability objectives, more broadly.

Excellent question, Michael. I mean, Brian, sorry.

That's a compliment. I'll take it. I'll leave it there though. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Now, next question coming from the line of Sabahat Khan from RBC. Your line is open.

Sabahat Khan

Great. Thanks. So just one, one on my part, I'm afraid a lot of color on just your optimism on '25, you know, as you think about next year, you're able to share maybe some color on, are there, you know, maybe it's the cyclical side of the volume market that might be picking up some areas of improvement. Is it the pricing that you have some visibility? If you can maybe just hash out to the extent possible on, you know, what's driving the optimism on '25, as you, as you head into the back end of this year. Thanks.

Yeah. I mean, it's, you know, we're, we're just in end of July here. So it's a little bit hard to say. I did say that. I don't, I can't tell you I'm super optimistic about the industrial side of, of the business, the roll off side. But by the way, I mean, you know, there's kind of no room to the only direction is up on that business.

At this point, it's been pretty soft. But everything else seems to be, I think pretty good. Pricing is, is, you know, something we're, we're pretty good at. And, and, and we use data and analytics, I think quite well as we, as we implement, you know, kind of our -- our pricing changes. So I don't, I don't see any reason to, to, to be concerned about pricing for next year. Volume itself.

We'll know a bit more as we get to, you know, get closer to 25 and how the overall kind of economy is, what's the, what the economy is going to look like. But look, I, I think, I think roll off is, is, you know, I don't think it's going to be worse. Commercial is a, one of the early questions was about the consumer.

I think the consumer looks pretty strong and I don't see any reason why the consumer won't continue to be strong next year. And then, you know, look, we're adding a business in Stericycle that we do think has a, a stronger growth trajectory, even in the solid waste business, just by nature of where they're, where they are. So I, I'm, you know, fairly encouraged by the volume outlook, but I'll, I'll be able to tell you more as we get closer.

The only, the only other thing I would add is 2025 really should be a big year for us and the sustainability related investment, seeing them roll through. Jim mentioned the seven of the 20 plans that will be online by the end of '24 will represent roughly 30% of our, our EBITDA of the $510 million that we had had told you about. And we have a similar story on the recycling plants, and we should get a bit of a tailwind from the shutdown costs that we've been incurring in 2024. So a lot of momentum, I would say on the sustainability investment side.

Great. Thanks very much for the color.

Thank you. And I'm showing no further questions in the queue at this time. I will now turn the call back over to Mr. Jim Fish, President and CEO for any closing remarks.

Okay, well, thank you all for your questions this morning. I hope we gave a sufficient amount of color and we're able to demonstrate our, our reasons for our optimism, both for this year and for the coming years beyond '24. So thanks again for joining us, and we look forward to talking to you next quarter.

Ladies and gentlemen, that does our conference for today. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.

• Read more current WM analysis and news
• View all earnings call transcripts

Recommended For You

About wm stock.

Trending Analysis

Trending news.