Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

Chapter U of

Flow Studies for Recycling Metal Commodities in the United 

States

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Circular 1196–U
Mercury Recycling in the United States in 

2000

By William E. Brooks and Grecia R. Matos

Chapter U of

Flow Studies for Recycling Metal Commodities in the United States

Compiled by Scott F. Sibley

Circular 1196–U

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

Gale A. Norton, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2005

Revised: 2006 

For product and ordering information:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

For more information on the USGS--the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, 

natural hazards, and the environment:

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

Brooks, W.E., and Matos, G.R., 2005, Mercury recycling in the United States in 2000, in Sibley, S.F., comp., Flow studies for recycling metal commodities in the United States: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1196–U, 21 p.
iii 

Contents 

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................................1 

Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................1 

Global geologic occurrence ........................................................................................................................4 

Primary production and processes ............................................................................................................4 

Sources of secondary mercury...................................................................................................................5 

Old scrap generated ............................................................................................................................5 

Automobile convenience switches ..........................................................................................5 

Dental amalgam...........................................................................................................................6 

Fluorescent lamps ......................................................................................................................7 

Lab/medical ..................................................................................................................................7 

Thermostats..................................................................................................................................8 

Chlorine-caustic soda industry .................................................................................................8 

Other uses.....................................................................................................................................9 

Imports and exports with unspecified mercury content.......................................................9 

U.S. Government mercury stockpile.........................................................................................9 

Discontinued and dissipative uses.........................................................................................10 

New scrap generated........................................................................................................................11 

Disposition of mercury scrap in landfills .................................................................................................11 

Old scrap recycling efficiency ..................................................................................................................13 

Infrastructure and processing ..................................................................................................................13 

Outlook ..........................................................................................................................................................13 

References cited .........................................................................................................................................14 

Appendix—Definitions ...............................................................................................................................21 

Figures 

1. U.S. mercury materials flow in 2000.................................................................................................3 

2. U.S. mercury consumption, by end-use pattern, from 1975 through 2000.................................8 

Table 

1. Salient statistics for U.S. mercury scrap in 2000 .........................................................................11
iv

Conversion Factors

Multiply By To obtain

Mass

metric ton (t, 1,000 kg) 1.102 Short ton (2,000 pounds)

For temperature in degrees Celsius (° C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (° F) as 

follows: ° F=(1.8×° C)+32.
Abstract

Reclamation and recycling of mercury from used mercury-containing products and treatment of byproduct mercury 

from gold mining is vital to the continued, though declining, 

use of this metal. Mercury is reclaimed from mercury-containing waste by treatment in multistep high-temperature 

retorts—the mercury is volatized and then condensed for purification and sale. Some mercury-containing waste, however, 

may be landfilled, and landfilled material represents loss of a 

recyclable resource and a threat to the environment. Related 

issues include mercury disposal and waste management, toxicity and human health, and regulation of mercury releases in 

the environment.

End-users of mercury-containing products may face fines 

and prosecution if these products are improperly recycled 

or not recycled. Local and State environmental regulations 

require adherence to the Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act to regulate generation, treatment, 

and disposal of mercury-containing products. In the United 

States, several large companies and a number of smaller 

companies collect these products from a variety of sources and 

then reclaim and recycle the mercury.

Because mercury has not been mined as a principal product in the United States since 1992, mercury reclamation from 

fabricated products has become the main source of mercury. 

Principal product mercury and byproduct mercury from mining operations are considered to be primary materials. Mercury may also be obtained as a byproduct from domestic or 

foreign gold-processing operations.

In the early 1990s, U.S. manufacturers used an annual 

average that ranged from 500 to 600 metric tons of recycled 

and imported mercury for fabrication of automobile convenience switches, dental amalgam, fluorescent lamps, medical 

uses and thermometers, and thermostats. The amount now 

used for fabrication is estimated to be 200 metric tons per year 

or less. Much of the data on mercury is estimated because it is 

a low-volume commodity and its production, use, and disposal 

is difficult to track. The prices and volumes of each category 

of mercury-containing material may change dramatically from 

year to year. For example, the average price of mercury was 

approximately $150 per flask from 2000 until 2003 and then 

rose sharply to $650 per flask in fall 2004 and approximately 

$850 per flask in spring 2005. Since 1927, the common unit 

for measuring and pricing mercury has been the flask in order 

to conform to the system used at Almaden, Spain (Meyers, 

1951). One flask weighs 34.5 kilograms, and 29 flasks of 

mercury are contained in a metric ton.

In the United States, the chlorine-caustic soda industry, 

which is the leading end-user of elemental mercury, recycles 

most of its mercury in-plant as home scrap. Annual purchases 

of replacement mercury by the chlorine-caustic soda industry 

indicate that some mercury may be lost through evaporation 

to the environment, put into a landfill as industrial waste, 

or trapped within pipes in the plant. Impending closure of 

domestic and foreign mercury-cell chlorine-caustic soda plants 

and the shift to nonmercury technology for chlorine-caustic 

soda production could ultimately result in a significant volume 

of elemental mercury for recycling, sale, or storage. Globally, 

mercury is widely used in artisanal, or small-scale, gold mining. Most of that mercury is lost to the environment and is not 

recycled.

The recycling rate for mercury was not available owing

to insufficient data in 2000*, and the efficiency of mercury recycling was estimated to be 62 percent.

Introduction

The purpose of this report is to summarize recycling 

of elemental mercury in the United States in 2000. For this 

report, the term “mercury” implies elemental mercury, which 

may variously be classified as a commodity, chloralkali waste 

or sludge, industrial waste, or toxic or hazardous waste in 

domestic or international commerce.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Minerals Yearbook, data for secondary production, or recycling, 

of mercury date to the 1940s (Meyer and Mitchell, 1946). 

Large-scale recycling of mercury took place in the 1950s 

when 10,900 t of mercury was taken to Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory in Alabama for production of the hydrogen bomb 

and most of the mercury was returned to the General Services 

Administration (Legacy, 2004). A study by Jasinksi (1994) 

indicated that widespread mercury recycling did not begin 

until about 1989-90.

Commonly used mercury products that may be recycled 

include automobile convenience switches, dental amalgam, 

laboratory/medical devices, which include thermometers, fluorescent lamps, and thermostats. For example, approximately 

Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

By William E. Brooks and Grecia R. Matos

*Correction posted on June 29, 2009.
2 Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

20 to 23 percent of mercury-containing fluorescent lamps are 

recycled. The overall use of mercury, however, is declining. 

Therefore, each year fewer and fewer mercury-containing 

products, or secondary mercury sources, are available for 

mercury reclamation and recycling.

A number of mercury-containing devices are routinely 

used in building construction and for heating, ventilation, 

and air-conditioning (HVAC) systems. Although mercury is 

widely used in chemical compounds and solutions, mercury in 

these materials is not recycled. Although the use of mercury 

in batteries and paints has generally been discontinued in 

the United States, some mercury-containing batteries can be 

imported.

Ever-increasing human health and environmental concerns, liability issues associated with hazardous waste removal 

and treatment, and efforts to prevent mercury-containing waste 

from being sent to landfills show the importance of the mercury recycling industry. Businesses may face fines and prosecution if mercury-containing products are improperly disposed 

of after use. Local and State environmental regulations require 

adherence to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

(RCRA) and subsequent amendments and the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 

which is also known as Superfund, to regulate the generation, 

treatment, and disposal of mercury as hazardous waste (U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1976, 1980).

Mercury has had widespread worldwide use in the chlorine-caustic soda industry since the 1950s. Nonmercury technologies, such as the diaphragm and membrane cells, however, 

now provide alternative methods for producing chlorine-caustic soda. Mercury is also used in a variety of products that 

include batteries in some children’s athletic shoes and toys 

that light up or make noise, in computer electronics, and as 

a fungicidal component of rubber flooring used in gymnasiums (Goodman, 2003; Speck, 2003; O’Connell, 2004). The 

Connecticut Attorney General asked cereal manufacturers to 

remove boxes of cereal that contained light-up toys with mercury batteries from store shelves (Gillespie, 2004). The materials flow of mercury in international and domestic economies 

is described in Sznopek and Goonan (2000, p. 17), and the 

present and future world supplies and demands for mercury 

are discussed in Weiler (2002).

Estimating the amount of mercury that is recycled in the 

United States is inherently difficult. For example, chlorinecaustic soda production routinely produces sodium-laden 

mercury amalgam, which is recycled in-plant as home scrap. 

In 1990, approximately two-thirds of recycling, in strict 

terms of mercury recovered and reused, involved in-plant 

recycling of mercury, as home scrap, in the chlorine-caustic 

soda industry (Jasinski, 1994, p. 11). Mercury used for other 

applications may be recycled, and many mercury-containing 

products, such as automobile switches and fluorescent lamps, 

may become part of a landfill. Breakage of fluorescent lamps 

en route to a recycling station or landfill can release mercury 

into the environment. The amount of mercury that is recycled 

is low, but the share of apparent supply that is scrap (excluding 

imports and exports for which estimates could not be made) is 

relatively high.

Improved analytical techniques and research have made 

it possible for industries to recover and conserve mercury that 

otherwise could escape into the environment (U.S. Geological Survey, 1970). The study of mercury releases is a global 

research priority (United Nations Environment Programme, 

2002; U.S. Geological Survey, 2003; European Commission, 

2004). Because of its role as an important mineral commodity and its effect on the environment, the materials flow of 

mercury was extensively covered in a U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) publication on materials in the economy (Wagner, 

2002, p. 7).

In the 1950s, the effect of mercury on human health was 

tragically dramatized when 50 people died and many more 

were poisoned from eating mercury-contaminated seafood 

from Minamata Bay, Japan (Greeson, 1970). In the early 

1970s, mercury-treated seed grain was consumed rather 

than planted, which resulted in more than 400 deaths in Iraq 

(Mangal, 2001). Concern about the level of mercury in fetal 

blood owing to consumption of contaminated fish is rising 

(Gugliotta, 2004).

The voluntary closure of domestic chlorine-caustic 

soda plants that use mercury and the subsequent disposition 

and management of the approximate 3,000 metric tons (t) of 

mercury contained in these plants is another serious concern 

(Raloff, 2003). There are 80 chlorine-caustic soda plants in 

Europe, and 48 of these are mercury-based. The date for closure of these mercury cell plants is voluntary and is expected 

to be no later than 2020. It is estimated that there is 11,500 

t of mercury in the cells (Barrie S. Gilliatt, executive director, Euro Chlor, written commun., November 25, 2005). The 

effect of the closure of European chlorine-caustic soda plants 

and the disposition of the mercury used in those plants was 

presented in a report by the European Commission (2004) and 

in a recent report on the global chlorine-caustic soda industry 

by Winalski and others (2005).

Mercury and mercury-containing products, such as computers, dental amalgam, and fluorescent lamps, are recycled by 

AERC Recycling (2003) in Pennsylvania; Bethlehem Apparatus Co. (2003) in Pennsylvania; D.F. Goldsmith Chemical and 

Metal Corp. (2003) in Illinois; Mercury Waste Solutions, Inc. 

(2003) in Minnesota; Onyx Environmental Services (2004) in 

Wisconsin; and USA Lights (2004) in Maryland among others. 

A list of more than 50 individuals and companies involved 

mainly in the collection stages of mercury recycling is listed 

by Mercury Recyclers (2002), and a list of mercury collection 

organizations is provided by Hospitals for a Healthy Environment (2004) and the Ohio Office of Pollution Prevention 

(2004). In 1998, 12 companies actually retorted the collected 

mercury-containing material. By 2002, that number had 

dropped to only five. The mercury recycling industry has been 

deeply affected by the increase in shipments of mercury-containing waste to Canada where the materials may be landfilled 

(Brad Buscher, chairman, Mercury Waste Solutions, Inc., written commun., January 18, 2005).
3

����������

���������

���

������������

��������������

���

���������

����������

����

�������

������������

�������������������

�����������

�����������������

�������������

������������

�����������������

������������������

�������������������

�����������

����������

������

����

�������

���

�����

�������

����

����������

��������

��

����������

���������

��

����������

��������

����

���������������������������

���������������������

�����������������������������������

�����������������������������

���

���

���

����

����

��

��

��

��

����

���

���� ����

����

��

����

���

���������������

���������

���

Figure 1. U.S. mercury materials flow in 2000. Quantities are in metric tons of contained mercury. e, estimated.

Introduction
4 Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

Much of the data in figure 1 is estimated, and the values 

and volumes of each category of mercury-containing material 

described herein have the potential for dramatic change from 

year to year. The average price of mercury was approximately 

$150 per flask from 2000 until 2003 and then rose sharply to 

$650 per flask in fall 2004 and approximately $850 per flask 

in spring 2005. Figure 1 shows estimated mercury materials 

flow in 2000, unless otherwise indicated, with estimates given 

for old and new scrap consumption and old scrap generated. 

Table 1 lists salient statistics based on data in the flow chart.

The authors would like to thank Thomas Downing, facility 

manager, AERC Recycling, Ashland, Va.; Bruce Lawrence, President, Bethlehem Apparatus, Hellertown, Pa.; David Goldsmith, 

President, D.F. Goldsmith Chemical and Metal Corporation, 

Evanston, Ill.; Brad Buscher, chairman, and staff, Mercury Waste 

Solutions, Mankato, Minn.; Michael Merry, logistics superintendent, Minera Barrick Misquichilca, SA, Lima, Peru; and Richard 

Fortuna, President, Strategic Environmental Analysis, Potomac, 

Md., for arranging site visits and providing review comments and 

documents for this report.

Global Geologic Occurrence

Mercury is a scarce metal that is liquid at room temperature and is obtained primarily from the red mineral cinnabar, 

which is a mercury sulfide (HgS). It averages 0.05 part per 

million in the Earth’s crust. A complete list of the chemical 

and physical properties, isotopes, and thermodynamic properties of mercury is given by DeVito (1995, p. 216).

Elemental mercury, which is also known as azogue 

or quicksilver, was known to Aristotle in the 4th century 

B.C. “Hydrargyrum” is the ancient Greek word from which 

the chemical symbol “Hg” is derived, and this word is still 

used, though rarely, today (Metal-Pages, 2004b). Sources 

of cinnabar and accounts of shipments of cinnabar from the 

Almaden (Arabic for mine) region in Spain to Rome are 

given in Goldwater (1972, p. 25) and Putnam (1972, p. 509). 

Agricola (1556, p. 427) described several methods for retorting the ore and recognized that exposure to mercury vapors 

during retorting caused the teeth to become loose. In Peru, 

the Inca recognized the health hazards of mercury, or “llimpi,” 

and that exposure to mercury vapors caused by firesetting, 

which was an ancient mining technique, in the mercury mines 

at Huancavelica caused the ancient Andean miners to tremble 

and shake (Larco, 2001, p. 135). Mercury from Almaden was 

used for expansion of Spain’s silver-processing capabilities in 

Bolivia and Mexico during the 1500s. Exploitation of the cinnabar deposits at Huancavelica in the mid-1500s by Spanish 

explorers provided a regional source for this metal, which was 

vital to Spanish colonial silver processing in the Americas.

The more-common ore of mercury, cinnabar, is dark red 

and soft, and may be associated with low sulfidation epithermal mineral deposits worldwide; this is a specific type 

of hydrothermal mineral occurrence that forms at depths of 

less than 1 kilometer and at temperatures of less than 300° 

C. Mercury, along with arsenic and antimony, is used as a 

geochemical exploration guide for precious and base metals 

at depth (Corbett and Leach, 1996, p. 180). Mercury ores 

may be found disseminated in fine-grained or brecciated 

sedimentary and volcanic rocks near volcanic centers, fossil 

hot-springs, and intrusive rocks and may be any age from Silurian to Tertiary (Cox and Singer, 1986, p. 178). The United 

States has numerous mercury occurrences (Dickson and 

Tunell, 1970, p. 1,674; Fisk, 1970, p. 1576). A bibliography 

of mercury occurrences in many countries of the world, such 

as Bolivia, Canada, China, Russia, and Venezuela, is given in 

Ebner (1954, p. 11).

Mercury is retorted from cinnabar, may occur as a native 

metal, or is produced as a byproduct of copper (tennantite-tetrahedrite), gold (amalgam), lead-zinc (sphalerite), and silver 

(kongsbergite) smelting (Rytuba, 2003). Coal-fired powerplants 

in the United States are another source of mercury releases to 

the atmosphere (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004a). 

Mercury may also be found in the copper concentrates and in 

the dust, fly ash, and other wastes associated with copper smelting (Jasinski, 1994, p. 11). In 1998, an estimated 650 kilograms 

(kg) of mercury was released into the atmosphere as the result 

of precious-metal smelting at one mine in Nevada (Rogers, 

2000). Several flasks of byproduct mercury that were produced 

during gold smelting were spilled during transport in a small 

town in Peru in 2000 (Wilson, 2004).

Primary Production and Processes

Mercury has not been mined domestically as a primary 

mineral commodity since the closure of the McDermitt Mine, 

Nevada, in 1992 (O’Driscoll, 2002). Data on byproduct 

mercury, which is produced mainly from gold mining and 

processing, are estimated in this report. In 1992, nine gold 

mines in the United States were producing and reporting their 

byproduct mercury production (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 2004a).

The gold mining industry is the primary source of 

new elemental mercury as a byproduct of gold processing. 

Byproduct mercury from Peru’s Pierina gold mine is recovered, carefully packed, and shipped to the United States for 

recycling. All handlers of this mercury, even customs agents, 

receive training in the safe handling of mercury (Michael 

Merry, logistics superintendent, Minera Barrick Misquichilca 

S.A., Peru, oral commun., May 3, 2004).

Van Zyl and Eurick (2000) projected that a minimum 

of 18 t of byproduct mercury would be produced from gold 

mines in Nevada in 2000. Sales of mercury retort systems 

permit the inference that byproduct mercury is routinely 

recovered at a minimum of six gold mines in Nevada (Summit Valley Equipment and Engineering, Inc., 2004). Calomel 

(Hg2

Cl2), which is a mineral and a mercury-bearing byproduct 

released during gold processing, may be captured by pollu-
5

tion-control devices at smelters and retorted to recover mercury (Bethlehem Apparatus Co., 2004).

In the future, mercury from coal-fired powerplants may 

be recovered as a byproduct. Researchers at the Illinois Institute of Technology have shown that gold-carbon filters remove 

98 percent of the mercury from powerplant test emissions and 

that the filter can be recycled and the mercury reclaimed (Guy, 

2003; Nasrin Khalili, professor of engineering, Illinois Institute of Technology, oral commun., February 11, 2005).

Canada has not produced mercury as a principal commodity since 1975 (Chevalier, 1998). Finland produces 

approximately 50 metric tons per year (t/yr) of byproduct 

mercury from zinc smelting, and Sweden considers the 20 t/yr 

of mercury produced from copper smelting to be toxic waste 

(Hylander, 2002).

The Swiss company Batrec, which was founded in 1989, 

is Europe’s leading recycler of mercury-containing materials. 

It processes more than 3,000 t/yr of batteries, sludges, and 

other materials (Beck, 2004). The Mercury Recycling Group, 

which is the largest recycler of mercury in the United Kingdom, has tripled its recycling capacity in response to European 

environmental legislation (Metal-Pages, 2004a). In Barcelona, 

Spain, hardware stores serve as recycling pickup stations by 

collecting batteries and fluorescent lamps in cardboard containers. Spanish consumers may call a telephone number (900 

30 05 06) for information on recycling and lamp collection.

In Australia, several mercury cell chlorine-caustic soda 

plants were closed at the end of 2000 because plants that use 

nonmercury technology were opened, thereby releasing that 

mercury onto the global market for reclamation and recycling (ACTED Consultants, 2004). In 2002, for example, the 

United States imported 107 t of mercury from Australia as a 

result of the closure of these plants.

In 2000, the United States imported 103 t of mercury, 

mainly from Australia (25 t) and Germany (25 t) and exported 

182 t of mercury mainly to India (65 t) and the Netherlands 

(51 t) (Reese, 2001). Additional mercury was sent out of 

the United States as chloralkali waste from a decommissioned chloralkali plant in Maine to India (Nairain, 2003). 

The United States has 4,436 t of mercury stockpiled by the 

Defense Logistics Agency (2003, p. 3).

On a global scale, cinnabar is mined by open pit or underground mining, and most ore is recovered from depths of less 

than 350 meters. Industry projections indicated that 25,000 

flasks (900 t) would be produced from the mines at Almaden, 

Spain, by the end of July 2004 (Metal-Pages, 2004c).

Gold mining companies in Nevada, which represented 

most U.S. production in the early 1990s, voluntarily provided 

byproduct mercury production data to the U.S. Geological 

Survey for 1990 (114 t), 1991 (58 t), and 1992 (64 t); the average byproduct mercury production for that 3-year period was 

79 t. Data for other years are not available. No information is 

available on byproduct mercury produced from any other potential domestic sources, such as precious- or base-metal mining 

and processing in 2000. Van Zyl and Eurick (2000) estimated 

Nevada byproduct mercury production to be 13 t for 1999 and 

projected that 18 t of byproduct mercury would be produced 

in 2000. Their estimates are less than the average amount of 

byproduct mercury reported to the USGS between 1990 and 

1992.

In 2000, reported world mercury mine production was 

concentrated in Spain (500 t), Kyrgyzstan (257 t), Algeria 

(216 t), and China (200 t) (Reese, 2001). Producing countries 

may be reluctant to report their production data of primary or 

byproduct mercury because of increasing concern about environmental effects, global human health concerns, and liability 

issues. For example, in 1972, primary mercury was produced 

in 22 countries; that number had fallen to 11 by 1987. Since 

that time, primary mercury production has generally decreased 

owing to the availability of byproduct mercury, environmental 

concerns, low demand, recycled mercury, and, until recently, 

low prices (Roskill Information Services, 1990, p. 7).

In general, mercury ores may contain from 0.1 to more 

than 2 percent mercury; most economic ores contain more 

than 1 percent mercury. The ore is crushed, screened, and 

then heated in a retort or furnace with limited ore beneficiation. Approximately 95 percent of the mercury contained in 

the ore can be recovered at commercial grade (99.9 percent 

purity) by this method. Other specialized production methods 

include leaching, dissolution, and electro-oxidation (Nowak 

and Singer, 1995, p. 222).

Sources of Secondary Mercury

Old Scrap

Discarded mercury-containing products, such as automobile convenience switches, dental amalgam, lab/medical 

devices and thermometers, fluorescent lamps, and thermostats, 

are the main sources of old mercury scrap. Miscellaneous 

electronics, batteries, computers, chlorine-caustic soda production debris, demolition debris, fungicidal gym flooring, lightup tennis shoes, and any mercury-contaminated materials are 

other sources of old scrap. Mercury Waste Solutions provides 

a detailed list of more than 50 acceptable materials for recycling (Brad Buscher, chairman, Mercury Waste Solutions, Inc., 

written commun., October 5, 2004). Some of these products 

are recycled; on a national scale, however, mercury-containing 

products more commonly become part of a landfill.

Automobile Convenience Switches

In 1995, 14 million mercury switches, or nearly 12 t of 

mercury, were used for active ride control systems, antilock 

braking systems, and hood and trunk convenience lighting. In 

2000, U.S. automakers used an estimated 4 million 1-gram 

(g) mercury switches (Partnership for Mercury Free Vehicles, 

2001).

Sources of Secondary Mercury
6 Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

Mercury was phased out of automobile switches manufactured outside of the United States in 1996 (Krist, 2001). 

In 2003, the European Union inaugurated a directive that 

prohibits cadmium, hexavalent chromium, lead, and mercury to be used in the manufacture of autos (Hickle, 2004). 

Therefore, 1996-and-later foreign-manufactured vehicles that 

enter the domestic scrap recycling stream are not sources of 

old scrap mercury. An estimated 150 to 200 t of mercury is 

still contained in the entire fleet of 210 million to 250 million 

vehicles in the United States and up to 10 t/yr of mercury may 

be released from shredded vehicles (Partnership for Mercury 

Free Vehicles, 2001; Zero Mercury Campaign, 2002). Names 

of domestic vehicles manufactured with mercury switches 

are available from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(1995) and the Clean Car Campaign (2003). Information and 

step-by-step instructions on how to find, remove, and replace 

mercury switches in domestic vehicles is provided by the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (2003). The Alliance of 

Automobile Manufacturers (2004) indicated that an automobile recycling facility that processes 500 cars per year can 

theoretically store 10 year’s worth of convenience switches in 

a 1-gallon pail. The industry is very concerned regarding who 

is ultimately responsible for the removal of the mercury-containing switches before automobiles are shredded—the manufacturer or the recycler. Removal of the mercury switches and 

replacement with ball bearing switches is relatively simple. 

The paperwork involved, the mechanic’s time, transport to 

recycling center, and the low payment of $1 per switch has 

done little to encourage recovery of the switches before shredding. Recyclers in Maine turned in 1,613 switches in 2003. 

This was less than 5 percent of the goal of 40 kg (approximately 1.2 flasks) of mercury (Worden, 2004). Solutions to 

the mercury switch problem in automobiles were addressed 

during a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 

Office of Solid Waste-sponsored State and Regional Roundtable—Mercury Automobile Switches, in Washington, D.C. 

on August 11, 2003. Therefore, because of the controversy 

surrounding responsibility for switch removal and to remove 

mercury from the recycling stream, the domestic automobile 

recycling industry has responded by considering recycling 

steel only from foreign vehicles (Kelly, 2004).

New Jersey has passed legislation that would require 

automakers to fund a State program for removing mercury 

switches from scrap vehicles. The goal of the program is 

to keep mercury from getting into the shredded scrap, and 

removal of the switch would entitle the dismantler or scrap 

yard to a $2 payment (Schaffer, 2004a). The number of 

switches being recycled is increasing, although no data on the 

actual number of recycled domestic automobile convenience 

switches are available.

Dental Amalgam

Dental amalgam was introduced into the United States as 

a filling for decayed teeth in 1833 and was originally composed of mercury and silver (Talbot, 1882). Modern amalgam 

contains mercury (50 percent), silver (34-38 percent), tin 

(12-14 percent), copper (1-2 percent), and zinc (0-1 percent) 

(Davis, 2003). Approximately 30 t/yr of mercury is used for 

dental amalgam (Linda Barr, economist, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, oral commun., February 2, 2005). A mercury amalgam filling may last from 2 to 20 years depending 

on the size of the filling (Dr. John Mercantini, dentist, Reston, 

Va., oral commun., December 12, 2004).

In Washington State, approximately 185 kilograms per 

year (kg/yr) of dental amalgam is recovered and recycled 

(Washington Toxics Coalition, 2003). Given that mercury 

comprises approximately one-half of the composition of dental 

amalgam, then approximately 90 kg/yr of mercury may be 

recovered from dental amalgam in Washington State alone. 

The use of amalgam is declining, and composite resin substitutes are available. The Watson-Burton bill (H.R. 1680, Mercury in Dental Filling Disclosure and Prohibition Act) seeks 

to prohibit the introduction of mercury for dental fillings into 

interstate commerce after 2008 (Burton, 2004). Some public 

health organizations, however, require that dental amalgam 

be used (Carlton, 2004). The American Dental Association 

(ADA) and State organizations recognize several use categories of amalgam and encourage recycling and use of separation 

devices (American Dental Association, 2003; Minnesota Dental Association, 2004; Nebraska Dental Association, 2004). 

In addition, the dental profession sponsored a symposium 

for Federal and State officials that addressed policies related 

to increasing the use of mercury-free fillings, best management and recycling practices for amalgam, and operation and 

maintenance of amalgam separators (Dental Mercury Release 

Reduction Symposium, 2003). Dental amalgam has also been 

recycled to recover silver (Lawrence, 1995). No data on the 

amount of mercury that is recovered are available.

The Office of Solid Waste met with amalgam producers, 

environmental service companies, recycling companies, and 

representatives of the ADA to advance the proper handling and 

recycling of dental amalgam waste that is generated at more 

than 100,000 dental offices in the United States. This collaborative effort, the National Partnership for Environmental 

Priorities Program, will promote responsible management of 

amalgam waste by use of a specific dental office collection 

device (a “gray bag”) to store dental waste until it is removed 

for recycling. The EPA and the ADA are encouraging voluntary participation in the “gray bag” recycling effort to track 

and prevent amalgam waste from being landfilled and to avoid 

legislation and mandatory adherence to amalgam collection 

and recycling.

A Swedish Government agency proposed that amalgam 

fillings be removed from the dead before cremation to cut 

emissions of mercury. The agency calculated that threequarters of Swedish citizens have amalgam fillings that could 

amount to 2.8 t of mercury, and given the 70-percent cremation rate, approximately 1.9 t/yr of mercury may be released 

through cremation (Reuters, 2004). This mercury could then 

be made available for recycling. A study of mercury and 

the cremation process in the United Kingdom indicated that 
7

approximately 11 kg of mercury was released from one crematorium chimney in 1 year (Mills, 1990).

Fluorescent Lamps

Reclamation of mercury from spent fluorescent lamps 

and mercury-vapor lamps began in the United States in 1989, 

and the startup recycling rate ranged from 10 to 12 percent. 

That rate, however, increased to about 20 percent by the end 

of 2000. Of the 670 million lamps discarded each year, nearly 

150 million are recycled; the business sector recycles approximately 27 percent, and only about 2 percent of residential 

lamps are recycled (Paul Abernathy, President, Association of 

Lighting and Mercury Recyclers, written commun., 2004).

The National Electrical Manufacturers Association 

(NEMA) indicates that fluorescent lamps sold in the United 

States in 1999 contained approximately 13 t of mercury, with 

each lamp containing from 10 to 20 milligrams of mercury 

(Zero Mercury Campaign, 2002; National Electrical Manufacturers Association, 2003). The recycling rate of approximately 

20 percent implies that 80 percent of lamps ultimately become 

part of a landfill (Abernathy, 2003). Therefore, approximately 2.6 t of mercury may be recycled from fluorescent 

lamps, and the balance (approximately 10.4 t) is not recycled 

because the lamps may break in dumpsters or en route to the 

landfill, thereby instantaneously releasing the mercury into 

the environment. Elevated airborne levels of mercury exist in 

the vicinity of recently broken lamps, and because discarded 

lamps are likely to be broken during conventional waste handling, exposure of workers who handle these materials is of 

concern (Aucott and others, 2002). When the lamps are properly handled, the mercury can be reclaimed and recycled and 

the risk to workers is reduced. For example, a 55-gallon drum 

(209 liters) that contains mercury-bearing phosphor powder 

from properly crushed lamps may contain approximately 1 

tablespoon (15 milliliters or 0.0015 g) of mercury. AERC 

Recycling estimated that its U.S. recycling operations collect 

10 t/yr of mercury from lamps, computer electronics, batteries, and dental amalgam. That material is sent on for further 

refinement (Thomas Downing, manager, AERC Recycling, 

oral commun., August 20, 2004).

Approximately 9 million fluorescent tubes that contain 

approximately 0.18 t/yr of mercury is recycled from Government agencies in the Washington, DC, area (Glen Smith, 

general manager, USA Lights, oral commun., September 15, 

2004). To respond to liability concerns, the recycling agency, 

USA Lights, issues a certificate to document the quantity of 

mercury-containing lamps that were received. Other lamp 

recyclers also issue an environmental statement of compliance 

to businesses that recycle their fluorescent lamps.

Some fluorescent lamps now include an information 

panel that has the symbol for mercury “Hg” and a statement 

that the lamp contains mercury and should be disposed of 

in accordance with disposal laws. A Web site (www.lamprecycle.org) and a telephone number (1-800-435-4448) are 

provided for further information.

The Association of Lighting and Mercury Recyclers 

(ALMR), NEMA, and the Solid Waste Association of North 

America (SWANA) are working with the EPA to increase the 

fluorescent lamp recycling rate through outreach and education. Their collaboration has resulted in an educational CD 

“Lamp Recycling Outreach Program,” which is aimed at anyone who handles spent lighting material or manages recycling 

and disposal decisions (Association of Lighting and Mercury 

Recyclers, 2004). Their goal is to increase the fluorescent 

lamp recycling rate to 40 percent by 2006 and 80 percent by 

2009.

Lab/Medical

Mercury is used domestically in laboratories and in a 

number of medical devices, such as sphygmomanometers and 

thermometers (approximately 1,814 kg each) and manometers (approximately 350 kg) (Maine Committee on Natural 

Resources, 2003). Sling psychrometers, which used two 

mercury thermometers to calculate relative humidity and were 

frequently broken, have now been replaced by digital instruments (Benmeadows.com, 2004). Mercury is also used in 

gastrointestinal dilators. The Mercury Reduction and Disposal Act of 2001 (S.351) called for a ban on sales of mercury 

thermometers, established a grant to help consumers exchange 

mercury thermometers for digital ones, and required that the 

mercury collected from the thermometers (up to 17 t/yr) be 

kept out of commerce (Collins, 2001). Some environmental 

agencies have even offered to replace mercury thermometers 

with digital thermometers (Washington Post, The, 2003). 

Although data are not available, only a small percentage of 

this domestically produced mercury waste is estimated to 

have been recycled. Specialty steel dial thermometers used in 

boilers, food-processing equipment, industrial ovens, and milk 

coolers also use mercury (Adarsh Industries, 2004).

Domestic mercury recycling flow estimates become 

murky because other countries may send their mercury waste 

to the United States for processing. For example, 320 t of 

mercury-contaminated waste was sent from a plant in India to 

the United States for recycling (Marley, 2003). At the same 

time, India has become one of the world’s largest importers 

(approximately 550 t in 2002) of mercury (Narain, 2003). In 

India, mercury is widely used for batteries, chlorine-caustic 

soda production (23 plants use from 100 to 150 t/yr), fungicides, lamps and medical devices (Mercury in India, 2004). 

In 2001, a shipment of mercury that was sent to India from 

a closed chlorine-caustic soda plant in the United States was 

denied entry by the Indian Government, and the mercury was 

unloaded at a port in Egypt to await return to the United States 

(Environmental Media Services, 2001).

More than one-half of end-of-life electronics, which 

include mercury-bearing computers, are shipped to Asia where 

the technology for recycling is limited (O’Connell, 2004). No 

data are available on the amount of mercury recycled from 

laboratories and medical devices.

Sources of Secondary Mercury
8 Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

Thermostats

Mercury-switch thermostats contain from one to four 

ampules of mercury, each of which contains approximately 

2.7 g of mercury for a total mercury content that may range 

from 2.7 to 10.8 g of mercury per thermostat. According to 

the NEMA, more than 50,000,000 mercury switch thermostats 

are in service in the United States. Approximately 1.8 million 

mercury switch thermostats are brought out of service annually with only 1 to 5 percent of that total being recycled (Zero 

Mercury Campaign, 2002). Recycling efforts are hindered by 

the lower cost of mercury thermostats and their longevity (20-

40) years compared with 10 years for the more-expensive, programmable, energy-saving, nonmercury thermostats. The use 

of mercury in thermostats is less than one-half of that used 3 

to 4 years ago, and the 5 percent being recycled may increase 

as mercury thermostats are replaced with digital thermostats.

Thermostat Recycling Corporation (TRC) announced 

that it has recovered approximately 29 flasks of mercury from 

250,000 used mercury switch thermostats that were returned 

by heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning contractors since 

it began recovery of these devices and reclamation of mercury 

in 1998. In 2000, TRC recovered three flasks of mercury from 

31,611 thermostats and in 2003, it collected eight flasks of 

mercury from 65,000 thermostats, which more than doubled 

the amount of mercury recovered in 2000 (Thermostat Recycling Corporation, 2004). The Colorado Department of Public 

Health and TRC provide information on collection procedures 

for recycling these devices (Colorado Department of Public 

Health and Environment, 2005). Packaging, freight, certificates of recycling, and other instructions for returning small 

quantities of mercury-containing waste, such as thermostats 

or ballasts, for recycling are provided by Onyx Environmental 

Services (2004).

Chlorine-Caustic Soda Industry

The preparation of chlorine-caustic soda has been an 

important use for mercury. The metal serves as a cathode in 

the electrolytic cell into which sodium chloride brine is introduced. An electric current is passed through the brine, chlorine gas is released at the anode, and sodium forms an amalgam with the anode metal mercury. Water is then added to 

the amalgam to remove the sodium, and the used mercury, or 

sludge, is recycled in-plant into the electrolytic cell (DeVito, 

1995, p. 224). This reused mercury may also be called “home 

scrap,” and because it is recycled in-plant, it is not a part of the 

larger mercury recycling flow.

Approximately 3,000 t of mercury is in use in the domestic chlorine-caustic soda industry that will ultimately have to 

be managed by recycling, sale, or storage as a result of the 

eventual closure of the plants (Raloff, 2003). After closure, 

this mercury will enter the out-of-plant recycling flow as old 

scrap.

In the United States, nine chlorine-caustic soda plants use 

mercury cell technology to produce chlorine and caustic soda 

(Natural Resources Defense Council, 2004). For example, 

approximately 48 t of mercury is routinely recycled on-site as 

home scrap at one plant in West Virginia (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 2000). Closure of a mercury cell chlorine 

plant in Maine resulted in the disposition of more than 100 t of 

mercury (HoltraChem Manufacturing, 2000).

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 2000 Toxics 

Release Inventory indicated that approximately 65 t of merFigure 2. U.S. mercury consumption, by end-use pattern, from 1975-2000.

Chloralkali

Paint

Switches

Medical

Batteries

Dental

Other

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

YEAR

QUANTITY, IN THOUSAND METRIC TONS
9

cury used in the chloralkali industry could not be accounted 

for (Planin, 2003; Eilperin, 2004). In another report, also by 

the EPA, an estimated 145 t/yr of mercury is consumed by 

the chloralkali industry (Kinsey, 2002). In its sixth annual 

report to the EPA, the Chlorine Institute indicated that 86 t of 

replacement mercury was purchased in 2000 (Arthur E. Dungan, Vice President, The Chlorine Institute, written commun., 

June 15, 2003). This quantity is shown in figure 2.

Other references indicate that losses of mercury during 

the chlorine-caustic soda production process have declined 

from 200 grams of mercury per metric ton of chlorine output 

in the 1960s to only 0.2 gram of mercury per ton of chlorine 

produced today (Bunce and Hunt, 2003). This mercury may 

have vaporized, been released to the environment, or accumulated in pipes or plant equipment. In 1992, the EPA banned 

land disposal of high mercury-content sludge generated from 

the electrolytic production of chlorine-caustic soda (U.S. 

Bureau of Mines, 1993).

India’s 23 chloralkali plants use from 100 to 150 t/yr of 

replacement mercury, and brine sludge that contains as much 

as 65 percent mercury is lost as a contaminant (Mercury in 

India, 2004). In South America, 13 chloralkali plants in South 

America use mercury, and no information on replacement 

mercury or treatment of the sludge is available (Nelson Felipe, 

manager, Clorosur, written commun., December 11, 2004).

Other Uses

Artisanal gold mining

In many placer gold operations in the United States, especially Alaska and California, in the 1800s, mercury was used to 

amalgamate the gold flakes in the sediment (West, 1971; Alpers 

and Hunerlach, 2000). This practice, which is also called artisanal, or small-scale, mining, continues as an important end-use 

of mercury in many parts of the world, such as, Ghana, Peru, 

Venezuela, and Vietnam (Hilson, 2001; Kuramoto, 2001; Brooks 

and others, 1995; Wu, 2004). For example, mercury is provided 

by a vendor in Lima, Peru, for unspecified purposes in South 

America (USHispano, 2004). It is possible that this mercury may 

be used in artisanal mining. Unfortunately, mercury for artisanal 

gold mining is rarely recycled and is released to the environment. 

At the Regional Awareness Raising Workshop on Mercury Pollution—A Global Problem That Needs To Be Addressed, which 

was held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, in September 2004, several 

papers were given that discussed the use of mercury for artisanal 

mining in Central America and South America.

Construction

Mercury products used in buildings should be removed 

prior to demolition so that the mercury can be recycled. These 

products include flame sensors in gas ranges, flow meters, 

freezers, fungicidal rubber gym floors, lamps, switches in sump 

pumps, and water heaters (U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency and Purdue University, 1999). Removal of a gas meter, 

for example, recently resulted in a mercury spill that resulted 

in evacuation of the residents from a Washington, DC, home 

(Washington Post, The, 2004). Recognition of and instructions 

for removal and recycling of mercury products, such as flame 

sensors, probes, and sump pumps are now included in the training curriculum for HVAC professionals (Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, 2004).

Electronics

Computer circuit boards, electrical switches, batteries, and 

fluorescent lamps for backlighting computer screens and panel 

displays also use mercury. The amount of mercury in a computer 

may vary between 50 milligrams (mg) and 45 g (Zero Mercury 

Campaign, 2002). Some of this mercury along with other toxic 

materials may be recycled (O’Connell, 2004). Trace amounts of 

mercury may be found in automobile headlights, liquid crystal 

displays (LCDs), and TV screens (McCann, 2002). The LCDs 

used in camcorders, cameras, fax machines, personal digital 

assistants, and projector televisions may contain up to 100 mg of 

mercury (European Commission, 2004). No information is available on mercury recovered from these uses. Although recycling 

programs have been somewhat effective, mercury is included in 

the approximately 3.5 percent of “other” metals recovered from 

computers and electronics (National Safety Council, 1999).

Imports and Exports With Unspecified Mercury 

Content

The U.S. Census Bureau publishes import and export 

statistics on elemental mercury of unspecified origin that may 

either be primary or recycled. A second trade category (Harmonized Tariff Schedule code 2843.90) includes “Inorganic or 

organic compounds of precious metals, whether or not chemically defined; amalgams of precious metals.” This category 

may contain unspecified amounts of mercury based on the 

metallurgical definition of amalgam as an alloy of mercury 

with any other metal (Thrush, 1968, p. 32).

In 2000, the United States imported 89 t of this nonspecific “amalgam” material; 51 t came from Canada, and 22 t 

came from Japan. In 2000, the United States exported more 

than 1,400 t of this nonspecific material; 1,142 t went to Mexico, 89 t went to Brazil, and 81 t went to Canada (U.S. Bureau 

of Census, 2005). U.S. imports of several mercury-containing 

compounds, such as mercuric chloride, mercuric iodide, or 

mercurous chloride, from Asian, Latin American, and Mexican ports is provided by the Port Import Export Reporting 

Service (2004). No information is available on the amount of 

mercury contained in these import/export categories.

U.S. Government Mercury Stockpile

The United States has maintained a mercury stockpile 

for strategic use. In the 1950s, 10,900 t of the Government’s 

Sources of Secondary Mercury
10 Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

mercury stockpile was tapped by the President for use at the 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the lithium extraction 

required for production of the hydrogen bomb (Smyser, 2002). 

Today, however, Government stocks of mercury contain 4,436 

t of mercury stockpiled at various locations around the country 

by the Defense Logistics Agency (2003, p. 4). In early 2004, 

the Agency indicated that the stockpiled mercury would be 

consolidated at one site (Joseph Johnson, manager, Defense 

National Stockpile Center, written commun., March 15, 2004).

Discontinued and Dissipative Uses

Mercury batteries that contain zinc or cadmium with 

mercuric oxide have a good shelf life, high energy density, 

and reliable voltage were widely used in military applications, 

cameras, and watches (Battery Business Directory, 2003). 

Owing to the development of other technologies and environmental concerns, mercury battery production was discontinued 

in the mid-1990s in the United States. Some countries, however, still manufacture inexpensive mercury “button” batteries 

for export. These have become a health risk in Peru because 

some children have eaten the shiny batteries and become 

blind (El Comercio, 2002; 2003). These types of batteries 

are imported for use in children’s toys in the United States 

(Gillespie, 2004). After use, these batteries are commonly 

put into trash that becomes part of a landfill, and the mercury 

contained in these imported batteries is rarely recycled.

Mercury was also used in house paints to extend shelf 

life and to kill mold and mildew. After studies showed that 

exposure to hazardous mercury vapor may occur, its use for 

this purpose was discontinued in the United States (Beusterien 

and others, 1991).

At one time, mercury and mercury compounds were used 

extensively as seed disinfectants. Now, however, the use of 

mercury or mercury compounds is not permitted on food crops 

in the United States (DeVito, 1995, p. 226).

Mercury is used in a number of chemical compounds and 

historically may have been used in a variety of cleansers and 

soaps, contact lens solutions, disinfectants, eye and ear preparations, photographic preparations, and nasal sprays. Mercury 

compounds are used for antiseptics, such as merbromin and 

ammoniated mercury, or in preservatives, such as thimerosol. Mercury bromide and mercury acetic acid were used in 

the coating of a specialized paper and film for use in hospitals, newspaper publishing, and microfiche printers. These 

specialized uses for mercury were to be discontinued in 1995 

(DeVito, 1995, p. 226). Mercury used for these applications is 

not recycled.

Figure 1 shows the quantity of old scrap generated and 

its flow—through processing and use. The volumes of each 

category of mercury-containing material have the potential for 

significant change from year to year; much of the data on the 

figure is estimated. This is because the use of mercury has 

been in decline, mercury is a low-volume commodity (approximately 200 t/yr went into fabrication in 2000); and mercury 

sales are not tracked. Estimated data are indicated by an “e” 

following the number in the figure and are discussed in the following explanatory section of the data in figure 1:

Imports, 103 t, in gross weight. Data published by 

Reese (2001). 

Mine/byproduct, 120 t estimated, domestic byproduct 

mercury production from gold mining from 1990 to 

1992 (data from 1981 to 1989 and 1993 to 1999 were 

not available) were averaged and compared with gold 

production data from 1990 to 1992, and byproduct 

mercury production data for 2000 were estimated and 

rounded from that relationship. This estimate is higher 

than the projection of 18 t of byproduct mercury for 

2000 (van Zyl and Eurick, 2000).

Old scrap generated, 250 t estimated, rounded amount 

of secondary mercury that became available to be 

recycled from mercury-containing products in the mercury reservoir that were fabricated prior to or during 

2000. For example, in 1980, approximately 2,000 t of 

mercury was used in fabricated products, as shown on 

figure 2, and in 1990, approximately 700 t of mercury 

was used; this was a 65-percent decrease in mercury 

use that consequently resulted in a reduction in secondary mercury, or old scrap, being available for recycling 

in and after 2000. Mercury use between 1980 and 

2000 declined by more than 90 percent, and limited old 

scrap available as a source of secondary mercury for 

recycling in 2000. Data are not available from 1998 

to 2000. Information from 1987 to 1991 was compiled by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(2004a) and showed a similar decline in consumption 

of mercury for manufactured products and, by implication, material that will become available as a secondary 

source of mercury for reclamation and recycling.

Unrecovered scrap, 95 t minimum estimate of the 

amount of mercury in discarded mercury-containing 

products, mainly batteries (57 percent), fluorescent 

lamps (24 percent), medical devices and thermometers (10 percent), thermostats (6 percent), and dental 

amalgam (1 percent), sent to landfills or lost through 

cremation or burial.

Hg reservoir, the domestic mercury reservoir includes 

secondary mercury contained in fabricated materials, such as automobile convenience switches, dental 

amalgam, medical equipment, fluorescent lamps, and 

thermostats, produced in past decades and still in use.

Exports, 182 t, in gross weight. Data published by 

Reese (2001).

Chloralkali replacement, mercury is purchased yearly 

by the chloralkali industry to replace mercury that 

may be lost in the brine sludge, or to the atmosphere 

or trapped in pipes in the plant. The Chlorine Institute 

reports that 86 t of replacement mercury was purchased 

•

•

•

•

•

•

•
11

in 2000 (Arthur E. Dungan, Vice President, The Chlorine Institute, written commun., June 15, 2003). 

Fabrication, 115 t, estimated that 200 t of mercury was 

used domestically in 2000, is shown in figure 2 and 86 

t was used as replacement mercury for the chloralkali 

industry; and the remaining amount which is estimated 

to be approximately 115 t, was used for fabrication. 

Specific amounts are not available.

New scrap, 5 t estimate, amount of mercury recovered 

during the fabrication process and returned for recycling.

U.S. consumption of mercury for 1994 indicates the following approximate general use pattern: chlorine-caustic soda 

(42 percent), medical/lab use (26 percent), switches and electronics (24 percent), lamps (7 percent), and dental amalgam (6 

percent) (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004a). The 

overall decline and, in some cases, disuse of mercury-containing 

products make it very tenuous to project that use pattern for 2000. 

Similarly, industrial demand has declined from a high of 2,120 

t in 1970 to approximately 200 t in 2000 as mercury substitutes 

become available and mercury available for recycling from mercury-containing (secondary) sources has declined (fig. 2).

Table 1 lists salient statistics from figures in the flow 

chart. Figure 2 shows how the various end-uses of mercury 

and, by implication, sources of secondary mercury for reclamation have declined since 1975; end-use distribution also 

declined for 2000 (Matos and Brooks, 2004).

•

•

New Scrap Generated

New scrap may be generated at plants that use mercury. 

For example, filling automobile switches, dental amalgam 

ampules, fluorescent lamps, medical devices and thermometers, and thermostat ampules may produce some spilled 

material, or new scrap, that is returned for recycling. No data 

are available on exact quantities of new scrap that are returned 

for recycling.

Disposition of Mercury Scrap in 

Landfills

If mercury-containing products are not recycled, then 

these products and their contained mercury may be landfilled, 

incinerated, or otherwise released to the environment. In the 

United States, the amount of mercury in discarded products in 

municipal solid waste was approximately 640 t in 1989. As a 

result of declining use of mercury in fabricated products and 

increased restrictions on the use and disposal of mercury-containing products, that amount was projected to be approximately 

160 t in 2000. Batteries and lamps made up 90 percent of the 

discarded products in 1989 and 80 percent of the discarded 

products in 2000 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, 

p. 1.5, 1.6). Information on mercury analysis, mercury management services, and sampling protocol at their landfill sites are 

described by Heritage Environmental Services (2005).

Table 1. Salient statistics for U.S. mercury scrap in 2000

[Metric tons unless otherwise specified; $150 per flask or $4,350 per metric ton in 2000. t, metric tons; NA, not available]

Old scrap:

Generated1 250 t

Consumed2 155 t

Consumption value3 $670,000 

Recycling efficiency4 62 percent

Supply5 250 t

Unrecovered6 95 t

New scrap consumed7 5 t

New-to-old scrap ratio8 3:97

Recycling rate9 NA*

U.S. net exports of scrap10 NA

Value of U.S. net exports of scrap3 NA 1

Mercury content of products theoretically becoming obsolete in the United States in 2000.

2

Mercury content of products that were recycled in 2000.

3

Value of mercury scrap based on primary mercury price.

4

(Old scrap consumed plus old scrap exported) divided by (old scrap generated plus old scrap imported plus any old scrap stock decrease or

minus any old scrap increase. Some items were not available.

5

Old scrap generated plus old scrap imported (not available) plus old scrap stock decrease (not available).

6

Ol d scrap supply minus old scrap consumed minus old scrap exported (not available) minus old scrap stock increase (not available).

7

Including new industrial scrap but excluding home scrap.

8

Ratio of quantities consumed, in percent.

9

Fraction of the apparent metal supply that is scrap, on annual basis. Trade excluded in apparent supply calculation because no reliable 

estimates are available on mercury content of imports or exports.

10Trade in scrap is assumed to be principally in old scrap. Net exports of old scrap minus imports of old scrap (not available).

Disposition of Mercury Scrap in Landfills

*Correction posted on June 29, 2009.
12 Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

International mercury disposal and waste management 

are other important issues for the mercury recycling industry. 

For example, chlorine-caustic soda sludge is included on a 

list of waste types accepted at a dedicated placement site in 

Canada (Stablex, 2004). Therefore, mercury-containing material may be sent to Canada to avoid an EPA ban on landfilling 

chlorine-caustic soda waste (Jefferson County Board of Supervisors, 1998; Envirosense, 2004). No data are available on the 

amount of mercury contained in the sludge that may also be 

called “industrial waste” and that contains varying amounts of 

caustic soda, mercury, and water.

The domestic mercury recycling industry is concerned 

and the environment is threatened by exports of mercury-containing waste that are shipped to landfills in Canada without 

retorting or reclamation of the contained mercury and unclear 

domestic regulations based on the size of landfilled debris, 

which is also referred to as the “debris loophole,” that permits 

unquantified amounts of secondary mercury that could be 

reclaimed and recycled to be landfilled in the United States 

with potential for release to the atmosphere or ground water.

As one example of this controversial problem, a health 

department in the Northwest United States estimated that more 

that 23 kg of mercury that could have been recycled from 

local dental offices was processed into a local landfill. The 

landfill manager indicated “the landfill does not knowingly 

accept mercury or hazardous wastes and the company relies 

on its customers to weed out mercury and has no detection 

equipment at the plant,” and a Department of Environmental 

Quality inspector for the region said, “I don’t doubt there is a 

lot of mercury going through the system and ending up in our 

landfill” (Lynch, 2002).

The approximately 95 t of mercury in mercury-containing 

waste that was landfilled in 2000 but could have been recycled 

is only an estimated minimum amount (fig. 1). For comparison, in 1992, the EPA projected that approximately 160 t of 

mercury would be landfilled in 2000 (U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 1992).

Information on mercury in landfilled materials in the following section is condensed from a recently published analysis 

of the problem that was prepared for ALMR (Fortuna, 2004, 

p. 2):

Landfilling mercury-containing wastes may result in 

significant releases to the air and to groundwater. The Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 were added to 

the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and required 

that waste be treated by the Best Demonstrated Available 

Technology (BDAT) prior to land disposal of the waste. For 

most highly contaminated mercury-containing waste, the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency considered BDAT to be 

mercury recovery using high temperature retorting. Treatment 

of these wastes by retorting is more expensive than burying 

the waste in a domestic landfill or exportation of the waste to 

Canada. Because of minimal or no treatment in Canada, there 

is a trend toward land disposal of mercury-containing waste in 

Canada rather than domestic reclamation and recycling. The 

rate of export of hazardous waste to Canada increased during 

the period 1995-2001 and the shipment of mercury-containing 

waste labeled as non-hazardous to Canada has also increased 

by an unquantifiable amount.

Recommendations to increase recycling of mercury-containing waste destined for any landfill include: 1) use total mercury content for determining if the waste is hazardous; 2) ban 

landfilling of all mercury-containing lightbulbs; and 3) close the 

so-called “mercury-debris loophole,” which is a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulation that indicates that treatment standards for all mercury-containing debris in excess of 60 

mm would be suspended. Mercury-containing hazardous waste 

has been so broadly defined that all mercury-containing waste 

found at landfill sites is classified as “debris,” and therefore, 

may be encapsulated and landfilled rather than recycled.

In a review of 2001 shipping documents to only one of 

twenty landfills designated for hazardous waste, it was shown 

that the mercury waste was shipped as “debris” and in some 

cases as “high mercury debris.” The amount of “debris” was 

from one to 372 tons and the amount of contained mercury 

was unknown.

The debris loophole, which permits landfilling of mercury-containing material without retorting, is a very serious 

recycling industry concern. An attorney for Mercury Waste 

Solutions indicated the following:

The specified technology of high-temperature mercury 

recovery (retorting) is mandated for inorganic waste that is 

in the high-mercury subcategory (260 mg of Hg per kg or 

greater). Hazardous debris is debris that contains a hazardous 

waste such as mercury. For mercury-contaminated debris, 

treatment includes encapsulation regardless of mercury 

concentration and no mercury reclamation is required prior 

to landfilling. Mercury may also be sent to a landfill from a 

conditionally exempt small quantity generator (CESQG), an 

entity that produces less than 100 kg of hazardous waste per 

month and may include mercury-containing products. Waste 

from a CESQG may be delivered to a hazardous waste landfill, a municipal waste landfill, or delivered to a recycling or 

universal waste site. CESQRs are exempt from other Federal 

hazardous waste requirements” (Peder Larsen, attorney, Mercury Waste Solutions, written commun., November 7, 2004).

Tracking U.S. mercury imports and exports is also a goal 

of the Canadian Commission for Environmental Cooperation. 

In 1997, the Governments of Canada, Mexico, and the United 

States committed to the North American Regional Action Plan 

on Mercury. Objectives of this collaboration include the identification and discussion of U.S. methodologies and processes 

for tracking imports and exports of mercury used in manufactured goods; the identification of U.S. reporting mechanisms 

used to track the ultimate fate of mercury-containing waste, 

particularly waste transported across national boundaries for 

storage, handling, processing, disposal, or long-term containment; and recommendations to improve international tracking 

and reporting systems (Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 2003; Powers Engineering, 2003).

Although mercury products may technically be recycled, 

mercury cannot be recycled economically from most con-
13

sumer products (Ayres and Ayres, 1999, p. 178). Recycling 

reduces the liability associated with the handling of hazardous 

mercury-containing waste (Thomas Downing, manager, AERC 

Recycling, oral commun., August 20, 2004). Even so, many 

of these products may become part of a landfill. Regulations 

aimed at reclaiming mercury-containing waste allow most of 

that waste to be landfilled as hazardous waste.

Disposition of mercury scrap and recycling is affected by 

the lack of information about products that contain mercury, 

the lack of information about proper disposal methods for 

these products, and, especially, the lack of consumer awareness about the health hazards and toxicity associated with 

mercury. For example, mercury stolen from a Washington, 

DC, high school laboratory was splashed around the school. 

This resulted in closure of the school for several days as a hazardous materials team cleaned up the spill (Blum and Fernandez, 2003). A cereal company has agreed to stop distributing 

products that contain promotional toys that use mercury batteries and have agreed to provide postage-paid return envelopes 

to customers who received any of the 17 million promotional 

toys (Bukaty, 2004).

Collection and recycling of automobile switches are 

hampered by the question of who is responsible for removing 

and recycling the mercury-containing switches—automobile 

manufacturers, automobile recyclers, or consumers (Inside 

Washington, 2002; Clean Car Campaign, 2003). A Federal 

judge has recently upheld a Maine law that requires automakers to pay for removal of mercury switches, and a proposed 

Massachusetts law will allow motorists to have the switches 

replaced for free while the vehicles are still in service (Schaffer, 2004b).

Only about 20 percent of fluorescent lamps are recycled, 

which leaves the remaining 80 percent destined for disposal 

at landfills with a high potential for breakage during handling 

and subsequent mercury release (Abernathy, 2003). Data on 

the percentages of mercury products that ultimately become 

part of landfills are estimated to be similarly high; exact figures, however, are not available.

Old Scrap Recycling Efficiency

Making an estimate of domestic old scrap recycling efficiency, excluding the approximate 3,000 t of mercury held and 

recycled as home-scrap in the chlorine-caustic soda industry, is 

not easy. More mercury-containing products may be recycled 

given the combined effects of national regulations aimed at 

reclaiming hazardous waste, lack of domestic mercury mining, increased demand, heightened environmental concern, 

and a recent rise in the price for mercury to $650 per flask 

(Platts Metals Week, 2004). This rise in price is caused by the 

decline in the fabrication of mercury-containing products since 

1980, which has limited the amount of secondary mercury 

that may be recycled, thus forcing an increased dependence on 

recovery and processing of byproduct mercury. On the basis 

of estimated old scrap generated and quantity of mercury consumed, the recycling efficiency was approximately 62 percent 

in 2000.

Infrastructure and Processing

Mercury from most mercury-containing products may be 

recycled. Individual segments of the industry, such as manufacturers and recyclers, vary in their approach to recycling. 

Some fluorescent lamp manufacturers now label their products 

and provide consumers with recycling information through a 

toll-free number and a Web site (Abernathy, 2003). Collection and shipping instructions are included on Web sites. For 

example, AERC Recycling (2003) provides packaging and 

shipping guidelines for computers, electronic scrap, fluorescent lamps, and other mercury-containing products. Onyx 

Environmental Services (2004) will coordinate proper packaging (OnyxPak) and transport of the used fluorescent lamps, 

ballasts, thermostats, and dental waste. Mercury Recyclers 

(2002) and the Ohio Office of Pollution Prevention (2004) list 

forms of mercury accepted, hazardous waste manifest considerations, mercury prices, packaging requirements, shipping 

costs, and other requirements. ALMR provides disposal information on a number of mercury-containing products (Association of Lighting and Mercury Recyclers, 2004). Similarly, 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2004b) provides 

information on where mercury-containing products are found 

and what should be done to recycle these products. General 

information on regulations and lamp recycling is provided by 

Fluorescent Lights and Mercury (2002).

Scrap material is treated much the same as mercury 

ores to recover the mercury. In general, mercury-containing 

products are broken or crushed in sealed vessels, and then the 

feed is heated (mercury boils at 357 °C, or 675 °F) in a retort 

to volatize the mercury, which is then condensed and filtered 

to a high-purity metal (Nowak and Singer, 1995, p. 213). 

Drum crushers may be used in the initial treatment of fluorescent lamps; regulations, however, on this procedure vary by 

State (Abernathy, 2003). In 1990, the EPA’s Land Disposal 

Restrictions indicated that hazardous wastes that contained 

260 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) or more of mercury must 

be retorted before being sent to a landfill. Temperatures in the 

retort range from 425 °C to 540 °C, and technical details of the 

retorts and recovery processes are given in Washburn and Hill 

(2003). Other special-use recovery technologies include acid 

leaching and specific processes for the removal of mercurycontaminated soil near chloralkali plants or Superfund sites 

(Stander, 2000; Mercury Recyclers, 2002).

Outlook

Through reclamation and recycling of secondary and 

byproduct mercury, the mercury recycling business is imporOutlook
14 Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

tant in reducing the liability of users of mercury-containing 

products and, at the same time, reducing mercury releases to 

the environment from mercury-containing products, such as 

fluorescent lamps, that have been landfilled. Even though 

overall use of mercury in the United States is declining, 

mercury-containing products are still available, and elemental 

mercury is an integral part of the chlorine-caustic soda industry. Human health and environmental concerns, however, are 

mainstream issues influencing how mercury is used domestically.

The recycling rate for mercury may be improved by the 

following:

Providing information to the public on the effects of 

mercury on human health and the environment and 

improving public awareness as to what everyday products contain mercury and how they can be easily recycled by advertising the location of mercury recycling 

and pickup stations. For example, The Home Depot, 

Inc. (2004) provides a fact sheet that explains the 

health hazards associated with handling and disposing 

of pressure-treated wood products that contain arsenic. 

A similar fact sheet could be prepared for commonly 

used mercury-containing products, such as fluorescent 

lamps. The sheet might contain health information, 

proper methods of disposal, 1-800 numbers, and Web 

sites of recycling organizations.

The recycling rate for fluorescent lamps for domestic 

use might be improved by the return of used lamps to 

the retail outlet with the customer receiving a discount 

on replacements. Some lamps now include an information panel that includes the chemical symbol for 

mercury (Hg) and a statement that the lamp contains 

mercury and should be disposed of in accordance with 

disposal laws. A Web site (www.lamprecycle.org) and 

a telephone number (1-800-435-4448) are provided for 

further recycling and disposal information. In Spain, 

for example, hardware stores serve as recycling centers 

for collection of fluorescent tubes and batteries and 

provide a telephone number for recycling information.

Providing incentives, such as rebates or discounts, for 

returning mercury-containing products to recyclers 

or manufacturers may encourage broader consumer 

participation in recycling.

Mercury Waste Solutions (2003) will provide sealable, 

environmentally safe shipping cartons, such as LampTracker Fluorescent Lamp Recycling Services for the 

return and recycling of used fluorescent lamps. Onyx 

Environmental Services (2004) will provide OnyxPak 

for the return and recycling of mercury-containing 

products. These products are much like laser printer 

cartridge boxes with prepaid return-postage labels for 

returning mercury-containing products to recyclers.

•

•

•

•

Continued substitution of nonmercury replacement 

devices and materials for automobile convenience 

switches, dental amalgam, fluorescent lamps, medical 

devices, thermometers, and thermostats may reduce the 

secondary supply of mercury for recycling.

Changing or closing the EPA’s debris loophole, which 

suspends treatment of mercury-containing debris that 

is larger than 5 centimeters. That material can presently be landfilled without treatment or reclamation of 

the mercury from the material.

Improved “cradle-to-grave” tracking of high-mercury 

wastes.

Amending the Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity 

Generator (CESQG) exemption to reduce the amount 

of mercury waste that can be disposed of monthly from 

100 kg to a lower amount. CESQG’s may currently 

dispose of their mercury-containing waste at a hazardous waste landfill without reclamation of the mercury.

Prohibiting transfer of mercury waste to Canada and 

other countries that do not require mercury reclamation 

from mercury waste prior to landfilling.

Promoting pollution control research and technology, 

which presently successfully captures calomel from 

gold smelters, to the capture of mercury from crematoriums, coal-fired powerplants, and the incineration of 

medical waste by using gold-carbon filters.

References Cited

Abernathy, P.W., 2003, Following the light: Resource Recycling, February, v. 22, no. 2, p. 24-28.

ACTED Consultants, 2004, Chlorine and caustic soda in 

Australia: Web site at http://www.chemlink.com.au/

caustic_oz.htm. (Accessed June 10, 2004.)

Adarsh Industries, 2004, Mercury in steel dial thermometers: 

Web site at http://www.adarshpressuregauge.com/

mercury.html. (Accessed June 18, 2004.)

AERC Recycling, 2003, Fluorescent and other lighting: Web 

site at http://www.aercrecycling.com/lamps. (Accessed 

August 13, 2003.)

Agricola, Georgius, 1556, De re metallica: London, 638 p. 

(Translated by H.C. Hoover and L.H. Hoover and reprinted 

in 2005 from the 1912 edition by Kessinger Publishing, 

New York, 638 p.)

•

•

•

•

•

•
15

Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, 2004, Getting mercury 

out of cars: Web site at http://www.epa.gov/Region5/air/

mercury/auto_alliance_brochure.pdf. (Accessed February 

17, 2004.)

Alpers, C.N., and Hunerlach, M.P., 2000, Mercury contamination for historic gold mining in California: Web site at 

http://ca.water.usgs.gov/mercury/fs06100.html. (Accessed 

October 24, 2004.)

American Dental Association, 2003, Best management practices for amalgam waste: Web site at http://www.ada.org/

members/prac/issues/topics/amalgamwaste.doc. (Accessed 

September 10, 2003.)

Association of Lighting and Mercury Recyclers, 2004, Association of Lighting and Mercury Recyclers—Lamp Recycling Outreach Project: Web site at http://www.almr.org. 

(Accessed February 8, 2004.)

Aucott, Michael, Linden, Michael, and Winka, Michael, 2002, 

Release of mercury from broken fluorescent bulbs: Journal 

of Air and Waste Management Association, v. 53, no. 1, 

p. 143-151.

Ayers, R.U., and Ayres, L.W., 1999, Accounting for 

resources—The life cycle of materials: Northampton, 

Mass., Elgar Publishing, 380 p.

Battery Business Directory, 2003, Mercury batteries: Web 

site at http://battery-index.com/mercury-batteries.shtml. 

(Accessed June 2, 2003.)

Beck, Manfred, 2004, Batrec—Recovering metals: Recycling 

International, no. 4, May, p. 24-26.

Benmeadows.com, 2004, Safer sling psychrometers and digital 

psychrometers: Web site at http://www.benmeadows.com/

store/dept.asp?dept_id=461. (Accessed November 9, 2004.)

Bethlehem Apparatus Co., 2003, Recovery/recycling service 

for hazardous and universal mercury waste: Web site at 

http://www.bethlehemapparatus.com. (Accessed June 3, 

2003.)

Bethlehem Apparatus Co., 2004, The world’s largest mercury 

recycler: Web site at http://www.bethlehemapparatus.com/

page02.htm. (Accessed October 20, 2004.)

Beusterien, K.M., Etzel, R.A., Agocs, M.M., and Egeland, 

G.M., 1991, Indoor air mercury concentrations following 

application of interior latex paint: Web site at 

http://www.algonet.se/~leif/yfBEU91a.html. (Accessed 

January 3, 2003.)

Blum, Justin, and Fernandez, Manny, 2003, Student’s home 

has excessive mercury levels: The Washington Post, October 8, p. B2.

Brooks, W.E., Guerra, A., Nunez, F., 1995, Gold resources of 

the Rio Chivao study area, Estado Bolivar, Venezuela, in 

Sidder, G.B., Garcia, A.E., and Stoeser, J.W., eds., Geology 

and mineral deposits of the Venezuelan Guayana shield: 

U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2124, p. H1-5.

Bukaty, R.F., 2004, Company will stop using mercury batteries: The Washington Post, July 16, p. E2.

Bunce, Nigel, and Hunt, Jim, 2003, Mercury pollution: Web 

site at http://www.physics.uoguelph.ca/summer/scor/

articles/scor104.htm. (Accessed June 2, 2003.)

Burton, Dan, 2004, Congressman Dan Burton: Web site at 

http://www.house.gov/burton/dan.htm. (Accessed February 

17, 2004.)

Carlton, E.H., 2004, NAACP support of H.R. 1680: Web site 

at http://mercurypoisoned.com/hearings/

carlton_statement.html. (Accessed February 23, 2004.)

Chevalier, Patrick, 1998, Mercury: Web site at 

http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/smm/cmy/content/1998/38.pdf. 

(Accessed March 23, 2004.)

Clean Car Campaign, 2003, Mercury in vehicles—Mercury 

use by model: Web site at 

http://www.cleancarcampaign.org/mercury.shtml. 

(Accessed August 13, 2003.)

Collins, Susan, 2001, S.351 Bill summary: Web site 

at http://www.mercurypolicy.org/new/documents/

S351Summary62502.pdf. (Accessed May 16, 2004.)

Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, 

2005, Mercury thermostat recycling program: Web site 

at http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/hm/mercury/therm.asp. 

(Accessed February 2, 2005.)

Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 2003, Crossing 

the border—Opportunities to improve tracking of transboundary hazardous waste shipments in North America: 

Web site at http://www.cec.org. (Accessed October 15, 

2004.)

Corbett, G.J., and Leach, T.M., 1996, Southwest Pacific Rim 

gold-copper systems—Structure, alteration, and mineralization: Society of Economic Geologists and the Society 

of Mining, Metallurgy, and Engineering, Phoenix, Ariz., 

March 8-11, 1996, Workshop, 203 p.

Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., 1986, Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, 379 p.

Davis, Eric, 2003, Facts about mercury: Web site at 

http://www.ericdavisdental.com/

facts_and_figures_mercury.htm. (Accessed August 13, 

2003.)

Referencs Cited
16 Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

Defense Logistics Agency, 2003, Draft mercury management—Executive summary: Fort Belvoir, Va., Defense 

National Stockpile Center, Defense Logistics Agency, 16 p.

Dental Mercury Release Reduction Symposium, 2003, Symposium: Web site at http://www.mercurypolicy.org/new/

documents/DentalHgLowellMtg012303.pdf. (Accessed 

November 13, 2003.)

DeVito, S.C., 1995, Mercury, in Kirk-Othmer encyclopedia of 

chemical technology (4th ed.): New York, John Wiley and 

Sons, v. 16, p. 212-228.

D.F. Goldsmith Chemical and Metal Corp., 2003, D.F. Goldsmith Chemical and Metal Corp.: Web site at 

http://www.dfgoldsmith.com. (Accessed June 3, 2003.)

Dickson, F.W., and Tunell, G.G., 1970, Mercury and antimony 

deposits associated with active hot springs in the western United States, in Ridge, J.D., ed., Ore deposits of the 

United States, 1933-1967: New York, Institute of Mining, 

Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers, v. II, p. 1673-1701.

Ebner, M.J., 1959, A selected bibliography on quicksilver 

1811-1953: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1019A, 

p. A1-A62.

Eilperin, Juliet, 2004, EPA to probe missing mercury: The 

Washington Post, May 30, p. A14.

El Comercio, 2002, Pilas de mercurio intoxican chibolos 

[Mercury batteries poison children]: Web site at 

http://www.elcomercioperu.com.pe/Trome/Html/

2002-12-27/Lima0017.html. (Accessed December 27, 

2002.)

El Comercio, 2003, Pilas dejan ciegos a chibolos [Batteries 

cause blindness in children]: Web site at 

http://www.elcomercioperu.com.pe/Trome/Html/

2003-08-12/Lima0039902.html. (Accessed August 12, 

2003.)

Environmental Media Services, 2001, India rejects U.S. waste 

mercury shipment: Web site at http://www.ems.org/

mercury/zz.mpp.01.01.25.html. (Accessed June 18, 2004.)

Envirosense, 2004, U.S. landfill ban sends mercury cell waste 

to Canada: Web site at http://es.epa.gov/techpubs/6/

13256.html. (Accessed July 23, 2004.)

European Commission, 2004, Mercury flows in Europe and 

the world: Web site at http://europa.eu.int/comm/

environment/chemicals/mercury/report.pdf. (Accessed 

March 30, 2004.)

Fisk, E.L., 1970, Cordero Mine, Opalite mining district, in

Ridge, J.D., ed., Ore deposits of the United States, 1933-

1967: New York, Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and 

Petroleum Engineers, v. II, p. 1574-1591.

Fluorescent Lights and Mercury, 2002, Mercury: Web site 

at http://www.p2pays.org/mercury/lights.htm. (Accessed 

December 2, 2002.)

Fortuna, R.C., 2004, Export of recyclable mercury-related 

wastes to Canada for landfilling and barriers to mercury 

recycling in the United States [prepared for Association of 

Lighting and Mercury Recyclers]: Potomac, Md., Strategic 

Environmental Analysis consultant report, 22 p.

Gillespie, Noreen, 2004, Connecticut attorney general wants 

mercury batteries out of toys packed in cereal boxes: Web 

site at http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/

MGBE16O14WD.html. (Accessed July 2, 2004.)

Goldwater, L.J., 1972, Mercury—A history of quicksilver: 

Baltimore, Md., York Press, 318 p.

Goodman, P.S., 2003, China serves as dumpsite for computers: 

The Washington Post, February 24, p. A1.

Greeson, P.E., 1970, Biological factors in the chemistry of 

mercury, in Mercury in the environment: U.S. Geological 

Survey Professional Paper 713, p. 32-34.

Gugliotta, Ray, 2004, Mercury threat to fetus raised: The 

Washington Post, February 6, p. A3.

Guy, Sandra, 2003, Researchers find potential way to cut mercury emissions: Web site at http://www.suntimes.com/

output/zincscene/cst-fin-ecol191.html. (Accessed December 13, 2004.)

Heritage Environmental Services, 2005, Mercury services: 

Web site at http://www.heritage-enviro.com/services/lab/

labmercury.asp. (Accessed February 2, 2005.)

Hickle, G.T., 2004, Old cars get new lease on life: Resource 

Recycling, v. 23, no. 3, March, p. 23-27.

Hilson, Gavin, 2001, A contextual review of the Ghanaian 

small-scale mining industry: Web site at 

http://www.iied.org/mmsd/mmsd_pdfs/asm_ghana.pdf. 

(Accessed September 16, 2004.)

HoltraChem Manufacturing, 2000, Assuming federal responsibility for managing the stockpile of mercury left over from 

ceased industrial production: Web site at 

http://www.ban.org/Library/assuming.pdf. (Accessed July 

10, 2003.)

Home Depot, Inc., The, 2004, Inorganic arsenical pressuretreated wood: The Home Depot, Inc. Consumer Safety 

Information Sheet GEN-791, 1 p.

Hospitals for a Healthy Environment, 2004, Mercury recyclers: Web site at http://www.h2e-online.org/tools/

hg-recy.htm. (Accessed May 20, 2004.)
17

Hylander, Lars, 2002, European perspectives on management 

of mercury stockpiles and mercury-bearing waste: Web site 

at http://www.newmoa.org/NEWMOA/htdocs/

prevention/mercury/breakingcycle/compendium/

Hylander.ppt. (Accessed March 23, 2004.)

Inside Washington, 2002, Automakers to challenge landmark 

Maine product recovery law: Web site at 

http://www.mercurypolicy.org/new/documents/

insideepald1912.pdf. (Accessed August 13, 2003.)

Jasinski, S.M., 1994, The materials flow of mercury in the 

United States: U.S. Bureau of Mines Information Circular 

9412, 22 p.

Jefferson County Board of Supervisors, 1998, Jefferson 

County, Wisconsin, board minutes: Web site at 

http://www.gojefferson.com/county/board/

minutes/1998/101398.html. (Accessed July 23, 2004.)

Kelly, N.E., 2004, Mercury threatens recycling of US-made 

cars: American Metal Market, v. 112, no. 15-1, April 12, 

p. 6.

Kinsey, J.S., 2002, Characterization of mercury emissions at a 

chloralkali plant: Web site at http://www.epa.gov/

ARD-R5/mercury/Chloralkalireport.pdf. (Accessed September 30, 2004.)

Krist, John, 2001, Many home products still contain mercury: 

Web site at http://www.insidevc.com/vcs/news/article/

0,1375,VCS_121_466016,00.html. (Accessed August 6, 

2003.)

Kuramoto, J.R., 2001, La mineria artesanal e informal en el 

Perú [Artisanal mining in Peru]: Web site at 

http://www.iied.org/mmsd/mmsd_pdfs/asm_peru_sp.pdf. 

(Accessed November 21, 2002.)

Larco, Rafael, 2001, Los Mochicas: Lima, Peru, Museo 

Arqueologico Rafael Larco Herrera, tomo II, 350 p.

Lawrence, B.J., 1995, Going down for the count: Engineering 

and Mining Journal, v. 196, no. 3, March, p. 42-43.

Legacy, 2004, The eight major processes of the nuclear weapons complex: Web site at 

http://legacystory.apps.em.doe.gov/text/link/link8htm. 

(Accessed February 27.)

Lynch, Jim, 2002, Northwest mercury waste going to Coffin 

Butte in Corvallis: Web site at 

http://www.corvalliscommunitypages.com/

mercuryright.htm. (Accessed June 13, 2004.)

Maine Committee on Natural Resources, 2003, A strategy to 

reduce the mercury content of products: Web site at 

http://www.state.me/us/dep/mercury/products.web.pdf. 

(Accessed July 9, 2003.)

Mangal, M.J. 2001, Assessing mercury contamination in 

the Amazon: Web site at http://www.mangal.dk/toc.htm. 

(Accessed May 7, 2004.)

Marley, Michael, 2003, US taking mercury waste from India: 

American Metals Market, v. 111, no. 20, May 26, p. 11.

Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, 

2004, Mercury in heating, ventilation, and air conditioning 

(HVAC) laboratories in voc-tech schools: Web site at 

http://www.newmoa.org/newmoa/htdocs/prevention/

mercury/schools/HVAC.pdf. (Accessed March 16, 2004.)

Matos, G.R., and Brooks, W.E., 2004, Mercury end-use statistics, in Kelly, T.A., Buckingham, D.A., DiFrancesco, C.B., 

Porter, K.A., Goonan, T.B., Sznopek, J.H., Berry, C.C., and 

Crane, M.M., Historical statistics for mineral and material 

commodities in the United States: Web site at 

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/of01-006/

index.html. (Accessed June 21, 2004.)

McCann, Joseph, 2002, Long road ahead to mercury solution: 

American Metal Market, v. 110, no. 52, March 18, p. 14.

Meyer, H.M., and Mitchell, A.W., 1946, Mercury: U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook, p. 767-782.

Meyers, D.K., 1951, History of the mercury flask: Journal of 

Chemical Education, v. 28, p. 127.

Mercury in India, 2004, Usage and releases: Web site at 

http://toxicslink.org/backend/images/publications/

publications-2-33.pdf. (Accessed June 21, 2004.)

Mercury Recyclers, 2002, Mercury, Resource Fact Sheet: 

Web site at http://pasture.ecn.purdue.edu/~mercury/src/

recyclers.htm. (Accessed December 10, 2002.)

Mercury Waste Solutions, 2003, Managing your risk and 

liability: Web site at http://www.mwsi.com. (Accessed 

June 23, 2003.)

Metal-Pages, 2004a, Mercury Recycling Group to triple capacity: Web site at http://www.metal-pages.com. (Accessed 

September 22, 2004.)

Metal-Pages, 2004b, Zinc ingot steady in China: Web site at 

http://www.metal-pages.com. (Accessed November 26, 

2004.)

Metal-Pages, 2004c, Almaden restart unlikely to unsettle 

mercury market: Web site at http://www.metal-pages.com. 

(Accessed February 6, 2004.)

Mills, Allan, 1990, Mercury and crematorium chimneys: 

Nature, v. 346, no. 6285, August 16, p. 615.

Minnesota Dental Association, 2004, Features of approved 

amalgam separators: Web site at http://www.mndental.org/

professionals/amalgam_recovery/revised_chart. (Accessed 

February 19, 2004.)

Referencs Cited
18 Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

Narain, Sunita, 2003, India and toxic mercury: Web site 

at http://in.rediff.com/money/2003/nov/11guest2.htm. 

(Accessed March 23, 2004.)

National Electrical Manufacturers Association, 2003, 

Lamp recycle: Web site at http://nema.org/lamprecycle. 

(Accessed August 13, 2003.)

Natural Resources Defense Council, 2004, Chloralkali plants 

using mercury cell technology: Web site at 

http://www.nrdc.org/health/effects/mercury/chloralkali.asp. 

(Accessed May 27, 2004.)

Nebraska Dental Association, 2004, Recycling amalgam: 

Web site at http://nedental.org/member_info/newsletter/

?topic=details&news_id=26. (Accessed February 19, 

2004.)

National Safety Council, 1999, Electronic product recovery 

and recycling baseline report, recycling of selected electronic products in the United States: Washington, D.C., 

National Safety Council’s Environmental Health Center, 

47 p.

Nowak, Milton, and Singer, William, 1995, Mercury compounds, in Kirk-Othmer encyclopedia of chemical terminology, (4th ed.): New York, John Wiley and Sons, v. 16, p. 

229-243.

O’Connell, K.A., 2004, Putting the pedal to the metal: Waste 

Age, v. 35, no. 4, April, p. 79-85.

O’Driscoll, Bill, 2002 (March 30), Border town would gain 

from development of mine: Web site at 

http://www.gcu-vse.com/06NewsLetterArticles/

border%20town.PDF. (Accessed June 2, 2003.)

Ohio Office of Pollution Prevention, 2004, Mercury recyclers: 

Web site at http://www.epa.state.oh.us/opp/recyc/

mercrec.html. (Accessed February 23, 2004.)

Onyx Environmental Services, 2004, Preferred solutions, 

services and technologies: Web site at http://onyxes.com/

index.jsp. (Accessed February 23, 2004.)

Partnership for Mercury Free Vehicles, 2001, Action plan—

Comprehensive solution to address mercury in automobiles: 

Web site at http://www.cleancarcampaign.org/

partnership.shtml. (Accessed August 24, 2004.)

Port Import Export Reporting Service, 2004, PIERS—Global 

intelligence solutions: Web site at http://www.piers.com/

default2.asp. (Accessed July 28, 2004.)

Planin, Eric, 2003, EPA issues new rule for mercury: The 

Washington Post, December 20, p. A7.

Platts Metals Week, 2004, Weekly prices: Platts Metals Week, 

v. 75, no. 52, December 27, p. 19.

Powers Engineering, 2003, Mechanisms for tracking United 

States mercury imports and exports: Web site at 

http://www.cec.org/files/pdf/LAWPOLICY/

Hg-Tracking-US_en.pdf. (Accessed August 4, 2004.)

Putnam, J.J., 1972, Quicksilver and slow death: National 

Geographic, v. 142, no. 4, October, p. 507-527.

Raloff, Janet, 2003, Mercury retirement—The ultimate solution may be to store the metal, not sell it: Web site at 

http://www.sciencenews.org/20030201/bob8.asp. 

(Accessed August 13, 2003.)

Reese, R.G., 2001, Mercury, in Metals and Minerals: U.S. 

Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2001, v. 1, 

p. 50.1-50.2.

Reuters, 2004, Pull mercury from mouths of the dead: Web 

site at http://story.news.yahoo.com. (Accessed May 20, 

2004.)

Rogers, Keith, 2000, EPA to work with state on toxic releases: 

Web site at http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2000/

May-13-Sat-2000/news/13568588.html. (Accessed June 2, 

2003.)

Roskill Information Services, Ltd., 1990, The economics of 

mercury (7th ed.): London, Roskill Information Services, 

Ltd., 128 p.

Rytuba, J.J., 2003, Mercury from mineral deposits and potential environmental impact: Environmental Geology, v. 43, 

p. 326-338.

Schaffer, Paul, 2004a, New Jersey mercury removal bill passes 

state Senate by 5-0: American Metal Market, v. 112, no. 46, 

November 16, p. 8.

Schaffer, Paul, 2004b, Judge upholds Maine statute on mercury switch removal: American Metal Market, v. 112, 

no. 73, February 19, p. 6.

Smyser, Dick, 2002, Y-12 mercury saga: Web site at 

http://www.oakridger.com/stories/072302/

opE_0723020022.html. (Accessed February 27, 2004.)

Speck, Sam, 2003, Household items that may contain mercury: Web site at http://www.ohiodnr.com/recycling/

awareness/facts/factsheets/mercury1.htm. (Accessed January 13, 2003.)

Stablex, 2004, Acceptable waste types: Web site at 

http://www.stablex.com/anglais/technology_waste.htm. 

(Accessed July 23, 2004.)

Stander, Richard, 2000, Rally aims to prevent shipment 

of mercury: Web site at http://www.meepi.org/files/

mpal20500.htm. (Accessed August 11, 2004.)
19

Summit Valley Equipment and Engineering, Inc., 2004, Client 

list, retorts: Web site at http://www.summit-valley.com/

client/html. (Accessed August 3, 2004.)

Sznopek, J.L., and Goonan, T.G., 2000, The materials flow 

of mercury in the economies of the United States and the 

world: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1197, 28 p.

Talbot, E.S., 1882, The chemistry and physiological action of 

mercury as used in amalgam fillings: Web site at 

http://www.amalgam.ukgo.com/talbot82.htm. (Accessed 

July 10, 2003.)

Thermostat Recycling Corporation, 2004, Thermostat fact 

sheet: Web site at http://www.nema.org/index_nema.cfm/

664. (Accessed November 4, 2004.)

Thrush, P.W., 1968, A dictionary of mining, mineral, and 

related terms: U.S. Bureau of Mines special publication, 

1269 p.

United Nations Environment Programme, 2002, Global mercury assessment: Web site at http://chem.unep.ch/mercury/

Report/final%20report/final-assessment-report-25nov02.pdf. 

(Accessed June 23, 2003.)

USA Lights, 2004, Fluorescent tubes and mercury contaminated devices: Web site at http://www.mdrecycles.org/

Directory2/Mercury.htm. (Accessed November 19, 2004.)

U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1993, Mercury in 1992: U.S. Bureau 

of Mines Mineral Industry Surveys, 11 p.

U.S. Census Bureau, 2005, HTS-2843900000, Inorganic or 

organic compounds of precious metals, whether or not 

chemically defined, amalgams of precious metals: Web site 

at http://dataweb.usitc.gov/scripts/REPORT.asp. (Accessed 

May 4, 2005.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act: Web site at 

http://www.epa.gov/Region5/defs/html/rcra.htm. (Accessed 

September 2, 2004.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980, CERCLA overview: Web site at http://www.epa.gov/superfund/action/law/

cercla.htm. (Accessed September 2, 2004.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, Characterization 

of products containing mercury in municipal solid waste in 

the United States, 1970-2000: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency OSW No. EPA530-R-92-013, 200 p. [Available from National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va., as NTIS Report PB92-162 569].

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1995, Automobile 

shredder residue report: Web site at http://www.epa.gov/

Region5/air/mercury/list_of_vehicles_with_hg_switch.pdf. 

(Accessed February 17, 2004.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2000, Toxics release 

inventory—West Virginia: Web site at 

http://www.epa.gov/tri/tridata/tri00/state/

West%20Virginia.pdf. (Accessed May 27, 2004.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003, Auto mercury 

switch removal: Web site at http://www.epa.gov/Region5/

air/mercury/autoswitch.htm. (Accessed August 24, 2003.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004a, Background 

information on mercury sources and regulations: Web site 

at http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/bnsdocs/mercsrce/

merc_srce.html. (Accessed November 12, 2004.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2004b, Mercury in the 

environment—Do you work with any of these items that 

may contain mercury?: Web site at http://www.epa.gov/

grtlakes/p2/mercpam.html. (Accessed February 24, 2004.)

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Purdue University, 

2004, Mercury in buildings: Web site at 

http://abe.www.ecn.purdue.edu/~mercury/src.title.htm. 

(Accessed March 16, 2004.)

U.S. Geological Survey, 1970, Mercury in the environment: 

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 713, 67 p.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2003, Geoenvironmental impacts of 

mercury and arsenic: Web site at http://minerals.usgs.gov/

west/projects/hgas.shtml. (Accessed June 2, 2003.)

USHispano, 2004, Peru: Web site at http://www.ushispano.com/

pais/peru/comercios/links.cgi?code=131020420. (Accessed 

November 2, 2004.)

van Zyl, D.J.A., and Eurick, G.M., 2000, The management 

of mercury in the modern gold mining industry: Web 

site at http://www.mackay.unr.edu/mlc/mercurygold.pdf. 

(Accessed August 4, 2004.)

Wagner, L.A., 2002, Materials in the economy—Material 

flows, scarcity, and the environment: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1221, 29 p.

Washburn, Charles, and Hill, Eldan, 2003, Mercury retorts for 

the processing of precious metals and hazardous wastes: 

Journal of Metals, v. 55, no. 4, p. 45-50.

Washington Post, The, 2003, Old thermometers exchanged for 

digitals: December 25, p. B3.

Washington Post, The, 2004, Mercury leak causes evacuation: 

October 28, p. B3.

Washington Toxics Coalition, 2003, Mercury—Persistent pollutant with lethal impacts: Web site at 

http://www.watoxics.org/content/pdf/Mercuryfactsheet.pdf. 

(Accessed July 9, 2003.)

Referencs Cited
20 Mercury Recycling in the United States in 2000

Weiler, Edward, 2002, Can the U.S. act alone on mercury?: 

Web site at http://www.newmoa.org/prevention/mercury/

breakingcycle/compendium/1. (Accessed March 23, 2004.)

West, J.M., 1971, How to mine and prospect for placer gold: 

Web site at http://www.imcg.wr.usgs.gov/usbmak/

ic8517.html. (Accessed October 8, 2004.)

Wilson, Scott, 2004, Peru’s mines dig deep at local discontent: 

The Washington Post, February 17, p. A13.

Winalski, Dawn, Mayson, Sandra, Savitz, Jacqueline, 2005, 

Poison plants—Chlorine plants are a major global source of 

mercury: Web site at http://wwwoceana.org/mercury/report/

Jan2005MercuryReport.pdf. (Accessed January 26, 2005.)

Worden, Edward, 2004, Switch hitting in the middle of a mercury melee: American Metal Market, v. 112, no. 6, February, p. 8-9.

Wu, J.C., 2004, The mineral industry of Vietnam, in Area 

reports—International—Asia and the Pacific: U.S. Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook 2002, v. III, p. 25.1-25.10. 

(Also available at Web site http://minerals.usgs.gov/

minerals/pubs/country/2002/vmmyb02.pdf.)

Zero Mercury Campaign, 2002, Mercury product pushers: 

Web site at http://mercurypolicy.org/new/documents/

ProductpushersNATIONALreport.pdf. (Accessed August 

13, 2003.)
21

old scrap supply. Old scrap generated plus old scrap 

imports plus old scrap stock decrease.

old scrap unrecovered. Old scrap supply minus old scrap 

consumed minus old scrap exported minus old scrap stock 

increase.

primary metal commodity. Metal commodity produced 

or coproduced from metallic ore.

recycling. Reclamation of a metal in useable form from 

scrap or waste. This includes recovery as the refined metal or 

as alloys, compounds, or mixtures that are useful. Examples 

of reclamation are recovery of alloying (or other base metals) 

in steel; antimony in battery lead; copper in copper sulfate; 

and even a metal where it is not desired, but can be tolerated, 

such as tin from tinplate scrap that is incorporated in small 

quantities (and accepted) in some steels only because the 

cost of removing it from tinplate scrap is too high and/or tin 

stripping plants are too few. In all cases, what is consumed is 

the recoverable metal content of scrap.

recycling rate. Fraction of the metal apparent supply that 

is scrap, on annual basis. It is defined as [consumption of old 

scrap (COS) plus consumption of new scrap (CNS)] divided 

by apparent supply (AS)—measured in weight and expressed 

as a percentage:

Appendix—Definitions

apparent consumption. Primary plus secondary 

production (old scrap) plus imports minus exports plus 

adjustments for Government and industry stock changes.

apparent supply. Apparent consumption plus consumption 

of new scrap.

dissipative use. A use in which the metal is dispersed 

or scattered, such as fertilizers or paints, thus making it 

exceptionally difficult and costly to recycle.

downgraded scrap. Scrap intended for use in making 

a metal product of lower value than the metal product from 

which the scrap was derived.

home scrap. Scrap generated as process scrap and 

consumed in the same plant where generated.

new scrap. Scrap produced during the manufacture of 

metals and articles for intermediate and ultimate consumption, 

which includes all defective finished or semifinished articles 

that must be reworked. Examples of new scrap are borings, 

castings, clippings, drosses, skims, and turnings. New scrap 

includes scrap generated at facilities that consume old scrap. 

Included as new scrap is prompt industrial scrap, which 

is scrap that is obtained from a facility separate from the 

processor, recycling refiner, or smelter. Excluded from new 

scrap is home scrap that is generated as process scrap and used 

in the same plant.

new-to-old-scrap ratio. New scrap consumption 

compared with old scrap consumption measured in weight 

and expressed in percent of new plus old scrap consumed; for 

example, 40:60.

old scrap. Scrap that includes but is not limited to metal 

articles which have been discarded after serving a useful 

purpose. Typical examples of old scrap are batteries, electrical 

wiring, metals from shredded cars and appliances, silver 

from photographic materials, spent catalysts, tool bits, and 

used aluminum beverage cans. This is also referred to as 

“post consumer scrap” and may originate from industry 

or the general public. Expended or obsolete material used 

dissipatively, such as fertilizer and paints, is not included.

old scrap generated. Metal content of products 

theoretically becoming obsolete in the United States in the 

year of consideration; this excludes dissipative uses.

old scrap recycling efficiency. Amount of old scrap 

recovered and reused relative to the amount available to be 

recovered and reused. It is defined as [consumption of old 

scrap (COS) + exports of old scrap (OSE)] divided by [old 

scrap generated (OSG) plus imports of old scrap (OSI), plus 

a decrease in old scrap stocks (OSS) or minus an increase 

in old scrap stocks] measured in weight and expressed as a 

percentage:

COS + OSE

OSG + OSI + decrease in OSS or - increase in OSS

* 100

COS + CNS

AS

* 100

scrap consumption. Scrap added to the production flow of 

a metal or metal product.

secondary metal commodity. Metal commodity derived 

from one contained in scrap.

Appendix