INVENTORIES OF WOODY RESIDUES AND SOLID WOOD
WASTE IN THE UNITED STATES, 2002

David B. McKeever

Research Forester

USDA Forest Service Forest Products Laboratory Madison, Wisconsin USA 53726

- 2398

dmckeever@fs.fed.us



### Abstract

Large amounts of woody r esidues and wood waste are generated annually in the United States. In 2002, an estimated 240 million metric tons was generated during the extraction of timber from the Nation’s forests, from forestry cultural operations, in the conversion of forest land t o nonforest uses, in the initial processing of roundwood timber into usable products, in the construction and demolition of buildings and structures, and in the manufacture, use, and disposal of solid wood products. Much of this material is indeed waste, b ut increasingly large shares are becoming valuable resources. The major sources of waste wood are timber harvesting and processing residues, which include woody forest residues and primary timber processing mill residues, and urban wood waste, which includ es construction and demolition (C&D) waste and municipal solid waste (MSW). Each type of waste wood differs in recyclability. Timber harvesting and processing generated nearly

178 million metric tons of woody residues in 2002, with 86 million metric tons b eing unused and deemed available for recovery. In c omparison, urban waste wood in the MSW and C&D waste streams generated 63 million metric tons of waste wood, with 27 million metric tons remaining unused and deemed available for recovery. These estimates are based on published waste generation rates and recoverability, measures of economic activity, and trends in virgin wood use in specific markets. Waste wood from other lesser sources and debris from catastrophic natural events, which may be disposed of o utside the primary waste streams, are not included in this report.

Keywords: forest residues, mill residues, municipal solid wood waste, construction and demolition wood waste, wood recycling.

INTRODUCTION

Large amounts of woody residues and solid wood waste are generated annually in the United States. In 2002, an estimated 240 million metric tons was generated during the extraction of timber from the Nation’s forests, from forestry cultural operations, in the conversion of forest
land to nonforest uses , in the initial processing of roundwood timber into usable products, in the construction and demolition of buildings and structures, and in the manufacture, use and disposal of solid wood products (McKeever 2003, McKeever and Falk 2004). Much of thismate rial is indeed waste, but increasingly large shares are becoming valuable resources.

Wood residues from primary timber processing facilities have been made into usable products for decades. Nearly all particleboard produced in the United States, for exampl e, is made from such residues. Wooden pallets, once destined for landfills after only a few trips, are now being repaired and recycled at increasing rates. About one

- third of all pallets produced annually are made from recycled wood. Waste wood from constr uction and demolition sites and from the municipal solid waste stream is also gaining importance as a

wood resource.

An important step in developing waste wood into a viable resource is to quantify the amounts that are available by source and type of mate rial. The major sources of waste wood are timber harvesting and processing residues, which include woody forest residues and primary timber processing mill residues, and urban wood waste, which includes construction and demolition (C&D) waste and municipal solid waste (MSW). Each type of waste wood differs in recyclability.

Table 1 shows estimated amounts of waste wood generated, being recovered or diverted from landfills, and available for recovery in 2002 for each primary waste wood source. Waste
wood f rom lesser sources is not included nor is debris from catastrophic natural events, which may be disposed of outside the waste streams examined here. All residues are measured in metric tons as generated. They vary in moisture content from green for forest residues, to air dry for many primary timber processing mill residues, and to 8%

– 12% moisture content for a large portion of urban waste. Estimates are based on published waste generation rates and recoverability, measures of economic activity, and trends in virgin wood use in specific markets.

TIMBER HARVESTING AND PROCESSING RESIDUES

Timber harvesting and processing residues are woody residues that are generated during the harvesting of timber from the Nation’s forests, forestry cultural operations, la nd clearing, and the processing of timber into primary wood products. Residues can be separated into those originating directly from the forest (woody forest residues) and those originating at timber processing mills (primary timber processing residues) (M cKeever and Falk 2004). Recently, residues associated with reducing the risk of wildfire on public and private lands have become important. Data on the amounts of these residues being generated are scarce and are not included in the figures reported here f or woody forest residues.

Woody Forest Residues

Large amounts of woody forest residues are generated annually in the United States. Woody forest residues are categorized as “logging residues” if generated during timber harvesting operations, or as “other

removals residues” if the result of forest cultural operations or land conversion (Smith et al. 2001). These residues are typically in the form of tree tops and branches, and trees cut or knocked down and left on site. The United States Forest Service

com piles information on the volumes of both logging residues and other removals every
5 years, with the most recent year being 2001 (USDA Forest Service 2004). Estimates for2002 are based on 2001 residue volumes adjusted by changes in industrial roundwood

pr oduction between 2001 and 2002 (Howard 2004).

Another source of woody forest residues is the material being removed from the forest to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfires and improve forest health. The Healthy Forest
Restoration Act 1 authorizes the use of Federal money for high priority thinning and forest
restoration. Amounts of these “fuel reduction residues” are not included in the statistics for logging residues or other removals residues because they are removed from the forest for use or dispos al. National estimates of removals of fuel reduction residues are not currently available, but the amounts are expected to increase in the next 5 to 10 years.

Logging Residues

Logging residues are materials removed from growing stock and from other timbe r sources during timber harvesting and left unutilized on site. Growing stock is a “classification of timber inventory that includes live trees of commercial species meeting specified standards of quality or vigor. Cull trees are excluded. When associated with volume, it includes only trees 5.0 inches (12.7 cm) in diameter at breast height and larger” (USDA Forest Service 2004). Included in logging residues are growing stock and other wood cut and knocked down during harvest but left on site, the sound top s above the 4

- inch (10.2

- cm) growing stock top, trees smaller than 5 inches ( 12.7 cm) in diameter, and unutilized trees cut or knocked down, including dead and cull trees. All material must be sound enough to chip. Stumps and limbs are not included in logg ing residue volumes. Based on these definitions, 55.0 million metric

tons of logging residues was generated in 2002. But stumps and limbs are also a usable resource, which contain a sizable amount of wood. On average, the volume of softwood
residue increas es by about 14% and that of hardwood by about 24% if stumps and limbs are included. The inclusion of stumps and limbs increased the amount of logging residues generated in 2002 by 11.2 to 66.2 million metric tons (Table 1).

By definition, no logging resi dues included in these volumes were recovered. If, on average, about 10% of logging residues was considered to be unusable because of size, location, or other reasons, then 59.6 million metric tons of logging residues was available for recovery in

2002.

O ther Removals Residues

Other removals are defined as growing stock and other timber sources cut and burned or otherwise destroyed in the process of converting forest land to nonforest uses. Also included is growing stock removed in forestry cultural opera tions such as precommercial thinning. Characteristics of other removals residues are the same as characteristics of logging residues.

In 2002 , 22.4 million metric tons of other removals residues was generated. Stumps and
limbs contributed another 4.8 milli on metric tons for a total of 27.2 million metric tons (Table 1).

1 For additional information on the Healthy Forest Restoration Act, visit www.fs.fed.us/projects/hfi/As with logging residues, no other removals residues were recovered. Assuming that, on

average, 10% was considered to be unusable because of size, location, or other reasons, then
24.5 mill ion metric tons of other removals residues was available for recovery in 2002.

Total Woody Forest Residues

Overall, 93.4 million metric tons of woody forest residues was generated in 2002 during timber harvesting operations, forestry cultural operations, and conversion of forest lands to nonforest uses (Table 1). By definition, all of this wood was sound, and none was recovered. Assuming that about 10% of the wood may not be usable because of size, location, condition or for other reasons, then the recove rable supply of woody forest residues in 2002 totaled

84.0 million metric tons

.

Fuel Reduction Residues

Many forests in the western United States are succumbing to years of drought and insect attack. The dead and dying timber is adding to already high fu el levels caused by decades of fire suppression. National estimates of the amount of this wood being removed to reduce fuel burdens are not available, but it is large. In a three

- county area in Southern California, for example, an estimated 142,000 ha of p ublic and private lands are in various stages of vegetation mortality (Rynk 2004a). In August 2003, an estimated 600 metric tons per day of dead and dying timber was removed from high

- risk areas. Removals are expected to increase to 1,500 metric tons per d ay and last for 5 years or more. Poor wood quality and high transportation costs limit the options for high

- value uses of this material. Some is being chipped or ground and used for erosion control and biomass fuel (Rynk 2004b). Some is simply being burned for disposal. Efforts are underway to attract business ventures such as pallet manufacturers, portable sawmill operations, and biomass

- to

- energy producers to better use this material. This is but one of many examples of many locations throughout the count ry where large quantities of residues are being created from fuel reduction activities.

Primary Timber Processing Mill Residues

Primary timber processing mills are facilities that convert logs, bolts, and other round timber products into other wood produ cts such as lumber, plywood, and woodpulp. These mills annually generate large amounts of residues in the form of bark, sawmill slabs and edgings, sawdust, and peeler log cores. The Forest Service compiles information on the volumes of these residues every

5 years. The most recent compilation was for 2001 (Forest Service 2004). The 2002 estimates in Table 1 are based on 2001 residue volumes adjusted by changes in industrial roundwood production between the 2001 and 2002 (Howard 2004).

Wood residues

An est imated 62.0 million metric tons of wood residues was generated by primary timber processing mills in 2002 (Table 1). Of this, 60.8 million metric tons (98%) was recovered

— 42.0 million metric tons for products such as woodpulp, nonstructural panels, and ani malbedding, and 18.8 million metric tons for fuel. Just 1.2 million metric tons remained after

recovery, all of which could be recovered.

Bark Residues

In 2002, 22.2 million metric tons of bark residues was generated by primary timber processing mills ( Table 1). Nearly 98% (21.6 million metric tons ) was recovered for either products such as shredded mulch or fuel. The remaining 0.5 million metric tons of bark residues was considered available for further recovery.

Total Primary Timber Processing Mill R esidues

Primary timber processing mills generated nearly 84.1 million metric tons of wood and bark residues in 2002, nearly three

- fourths of which was wood (Table 1). These mills are very efficient in terms of complete utilization of the resource. Of the total residues generated, less than 2% was not used in the production of other wood products or as fuel. Just under

2 million metric tons of residues remained unused in 2002. Although these residues could conceivably be recovered, it is very unlikely that they will be.

Total Timber Processing and Harvesting Residues

Nearly 178 million metric tons of timber harvesting and processing residues was generated in the United States in 2002 (Table 1). In addition, large, unquantified volumes of residues were

gene rated as part of fuel reduction efforts. Of the 178 million metric tons generated,

92 million metric tons was either recovered (47 million metric tons), combusted (36 million metric tons), or deemed not usable (9 million metric tons). The remaining 86 mill ion metric tons was considered to be available for recovery.

URBAN WOOD WASTE

In general, urban wood waste is waste wood generated by the production, use, and disposal of finished wood products. Sources include the “wood” and the “woody yard trimmings”

c omponents of the MSW stream as well as the waste wood generated during the construction of new buildings and structures, the repair and remodeling of existing buildings and structures, and the demolition of existing buildings and structures (C&D waste) (Fa lk and McKeever 2004). Urban wood waste differs from timber harvesting and processing residues in that it is primarily finished wood products such as lumber, plywood, old furniture, pallets, and containers and other consumer wood products, not roundwood or roundwood residues.

Construction and Demolition Waste

Construction and demolition (C&D) waste is usually referred to as a single form of waste. But since both forms of waste originate from distinctly different types of activities, have
different charac teristics, and differ in their ease of separation, recovery, and recyclability, they should be evaluated separately. Construction waste originates from the construction and repair and remodeling of residential and nonresidential buildings and structures; i t consists ofcontemporary building materials, which can be readily separated at the job site. Demolition

waste is generated in the demolition of buildings or other structures. It is often contaminated with paints, fasteners, adhesives, wall covering mater ials, insulation, and dirt, and typically contains a diverse mix of building materials. Some of these materials may no longer be in use or are now considered to be hazardous, making recovery more difficult. On

- site separation of
demolition waste can be ver y time

- consuming and costly.

Little consistent information is available nationally on C&D generation and recovery, and even less on demolition debris generation and recovery. Available data are limited to anecdotal or case studies at specific points in ti me, exhibit a high degree of variability within and between studies, and tend to reflect local building practices and building products used ( Solid Waste Association of North America 1993

, McGregor et al. 1993 ). Many factors affect waste generation rates, including overall activity level, type of structures being built or demolished, type of building materials used, age of structure being demolished, and extent to which materials are removed for reuse or recycling prior to demolition. Because of this
variab ility, information that was able to be linked to national levels of construction activity and population was used to estimate C&D waste generation. The resulting estimates, although not precise, provide a good, overall indication of the C&D waste resource.

Construction Waste

The economic well being of a nation directly affects its generation of construction waste. When prosperous, housing starts and average house size, expenditures for new nonresidential construction, and expenditures for the repair and r emodeling of existing buildings and structures are high. High levels of building activity result in high levels of construction waste. The construction, repair, and remodeling of single

- family houses, multifamily houses, and nonresidential buildings and st ructures are the bases for the construction waste estimates

in Table 2.

An estimated 34.5 million metric tons of wood products was used to build 1.3 million new single

- family houses and 0.3 million new multifamily apartment units in 2002 (McKeever 2002, Bureau of the Census 2004 ) (Table 2). This level of construction resulted in an

estimated 3.7 million metric tons of wood waste being generated, about 11% of the total volume of wood used. The repair and remodeling of existing residences, both single

- famil y and multifamily, required an additional 29.3 million metric tons of wood products and generated 5.9 million metric tons of waste wood, or 20% of the total volume of wood used. The repair and remodeling of residential structures tends to generate more was te than does new residential construction because many of these projects involve both demolition and construction activities, each of which generates waste. Based on average rates of recoverability and usability, an estimated 7.1 million metric tons of woo d waste was deemed available for further recovery from residential construction in 2002, nearly three

- fourths of the waste wood generated.

In terms of total wood use, nonresidential construction is small compared to residential

construction. In 2002 the c onstruction, repair, and remodeling of nonresidential buildings and structures required only about one

- tenth the amount of wood products required for residentialconstruction. This is because typically only smaller, low

- rise nonresidential buildings use

su bstantial amounts of wood. In 2002, 6.8 million metric tons of wood was used for the construction, repair, and remodeling of low

- rise nonresidential buildings and structures, which resulted in the generation of 0.9 million metric tons of waste wood; nearl y 0.8 million metric tons was considered available for recovery. Large nonresidential projects were not included in this analysis, but since wood is not the primary building material for most such projects, total waste wood generation and recovery estimate s should not be greatly affected by the exclusion of these data.

Overall, 70.6 million metric tons of wood was used for construction in 2002. Wood waste
was estimated to be 10.5 million metric tons (15% of total wood use) , with 7.8 million metric

tons ava ilable for recovery (75% of all construction waste wood generated) (Table 2). About 2.7 million metric tons of the generated waste wood was already being recovered or was not
usable.

Demolition Waste

Demolition waste is a mixture of building materials an d other building

- related items generated when a building or other structure is razed. Demolition waste typically contains, in varying amounts, aggregate, concrete, wood, paper, metal, insulation, glass, and other types of building materials. Waste from old er structures can also contain contaminates and hazardous materials such as asbestos, lead

- based finishes, mercury, and polychlorinated biphenyl compounds. Estimates of demolition waste have been made over the years for specific localities. These estimates typically include new construction waste and are often based on the size of the resident population. (Urban areas tend to generate more C&D waste per capita than do suburban or rural areas.) A 1998 study conducted by the EPA reviewed all
relevant demoliti

on waste case studies (EPA 1998). Based on these studies, the EPA

estimated that 58.8 million metric tons of demolition waste was generated in 1996. This was equivalent to about 0.6 kg of demolition waste per person per day. Based on this rate and the

chan ging population, about 62.9 million metric tons of demolition waste was generated in 2002. Case studies on the mix of materials entering C&D landfills indicated that, on average, about 40% of C&D waste was wood. Thus, about 25.2 million metric tons of demo lition waste wood was generated in 2002 (Table 1).

Demolition waste is much more difficult to recover and recycle than is construction waste. Contamination is a major deterrent to recovery, as is the commingling of wood with other nonwood building product s. Demolition waste recycling operations typically reject entire loads of demolition waste if contaminated. Demolition waste wood recovery is difficult to determine because it is affected by many factors, including the technology used to process the waste, products manufactured from the waste, and source of waste. Based on limited case studies, an initial overall 30% recovery rate was assumed for 1990 with steady improvement
over time. 2 An estimated 10.6 million metric tons of demolition waste wood was deem ed

recoverable in 2002.

2 Personal communication, James McElvenny, Wood Recycling, Inc., Woburn, MA, March 27, 1995.Efforts are now underway to recover material from buildings and other structures for reuse or

recycling in lieu of demolition. This “deconstruction” or manual disassembly of wood

framed and other types of buildings may substantiall y reduce the amounts of demolition waste wood generated in the future.

Total Construction and Demolition Waste

Overall, about 35.7 million metric tons of C&D wood waste was generated in 2002 (Table 1). About 30% originated in construction activities and 70% in demolition activities. About 50% of this waste (18.4 million metric tons) was of acceptable size, quality, and condition to be considered available for recovery. Nearly 43% of the recoverable waste wood was from
construction. About 17.3 million met ric tons was already being recovered, was being combusted, or was unusable.

Municipal Solid Waste

Municipal solid waste (MSW), also known as trash or garbage, consists of everyday items such as product packaging, grass clippings, furniture, clothing, bo ttles, food scraps, newspapers, appliances, and batteries (EPA 2003). Materials that may also be disposed in landfills but are not generally considered MSW include construction and demolition debris, municipal wastewater treatment sludges, and non

- hazardou

s industrial wastes. In 2002, nearly 209 million metric tons of MSW was generated by 288 million Americans. This represents about 724 kg

per person per day. MSW is typically divided into product components. Paper and paperboard was the single largest compo nent of MSW at 75 million metric tons, or about 36% of all MSW (Fig. 1). Yard trimmings was second at 25 million metric tons (12%), followed closely by food waste and plastics at 24 and 23 million metric tons, respectively. These four components accounted for 70% of total MSW. Overall, about 62 million metric tons (30%) of this material was recovered for recycling or composting;

147 million metric tons (70%) was discarded in landfills or sent to combustion facilities. Paper and paperboard, and yard trimming s accounted for about three

- fourths of all recovery.

Two components of MSW contain solid waste wood, “wood” and “yard trimmings.” The wood component includes items such as wooden furniture and cabinets, pallets and containers, scrap lumber and wooden pane ls, and wood from manufacturing facilities. It does

n ot include roundwood or unprocessed wood, and repaired or recycled pallets. Yard trimmings include leaves and grass clippings, brush, and tree trimmings and removals. Each of these two components is an i mportant source of wood waste.

Wood Component

The wood component of MSW accounted for 12.0 million metric tons of waste wood in 2002, about 6% of all MSW (Table 1). Less than 10% (1.1 million metric tons) was recovered for recycling or composting, and 22 % (2.7 million metric tons) was combusted (nearly all for energy recovery). T he remaining 8.2 million metric tons was discarded. Of the discarded wood, about one

- third (2.7 million metric tons) was estimated to be unacceptable for recovery for other uses b ecause of excessive contamination, commingling with otherwaste, size and distribution of material, or other reasons. The remaining 5.5 million metric

tons of waste wood was available for further recovery.

Yard Trimmings Component

Yard trimmings are a mi xture of woody and herbaceous material that varies in composition by geographical location and time of year. Included are tree and brush trimmings, grass clippings, leaves, and garden material from residential, institutional, and commercial sources.

In 200 2, 25.4 million metric tons of yard trimmings was generated in the United States (Fig. 1). Detailed information on the composition of this material is not readily available from the EPA, who tracks such data, but is based on an analysis of the woody compon ent of yard trimmings conducted in 1994 ( NEOS Corp. 1995) . An estimated 14.8 million metric

tons of wood chips, logs, stumps, tree tops, and brush was generated as part of MSW in 2002. Of this, about 8.5 million metric tons was recovered, primarily for com post and mulch. Of the remaining 6.3 million metric tons, nearly equal amounts were sent to combustion
facilities or were deemed unusable (1.5 and 1.6 million metric tons, respectively)

. The remaining 3.2 million metric tons of woody yard trimmings was ava ilable for further recovery. It is interesting to note that the volume of woody yard trimmings generated as part
of MSW in 2002 exceeded the volume of timber harvested from National Forests in the United States in the same year (McKeever and Skog 2003).

T otal Wood in Municipal Solid Waste

In 2002, 26.8 million metric tons of wood waste was generated as part of MSW (Table 1). This accounts for about 13% of all MSW generated. About 9.7 million metric tons was recovered for recycling or composting, with the remainder being discarded. Of this discarded portion, 4.2 million metric tons was combusted and 13.0 million metric tons was sent to

landfills. About one

- third (4.3 million metric tons) of the landfilled material was considered
to be of little or no value for further recovery. The remaining 8.7 million metric tons was deemed available for recovery for recycling. However, many factors affect the recoverability and usability of MSW, such as the size and condition of the material, extent of commingling
with ot her types of waste, contamination and physical location of the material, and costs associated with acquiring, transporting, and processing the material into a usable raw material. Overall economic conditions and changing recycling rates also affect supplie s.

Total Urban Wood Waste

In 2002, 62.5 million metric tons of urban wood waste was generated in the United States (Table 1). This consisted of 26.8 million metric tons of wood in MSW and 35.7 million

metric tons in C&D waste. More than half the MSW wast e wood was in the form of woody yard trimmings (wood chips, logs, stumps, tree tops, and brush), which more closely resembles forest residues than MSW waste wood ( wooden furniture and cabinets, pallets and containers, scrap lumber and wooden panels, and wo od from manufacturing facilities). Demolition waste was the largest individual category (25.2 million metric tons), slightly less than all waste wood in MSW. More than half (57%) of all urban waste wood was either recovered for recycling, combusted, or dee med unacceptable for recovery for other usesbecause of excessive contamination, commingling with other waste, size and distribution of

material, or other reasons. The remaining 27.1 million metric tons of urban waste wood was

considered to be available fo r further recovery. Of this amount, about one

- third was MSW (37% woody yard trimmings) and two

- thirds from the construction and demolition of buildings and structures (57% demolition waste).

OTHER SOURCES OF WASTE WOOD

Other sources of waste wood include chemically treated wood from railroad ties, telephone and utility poles, and pier and dock timbers; chipped brush and limbs from utility right

- of

way maintenance; and industrial waste wood outside the normal waste streams. Some of this material is being r eused, burned, or disposed of in hazardous waste landfills but much is being left on site. Chemical treatments and costs of collection make much of this material difficult to recover. The amounts of wood available from these other sources are fairly small. For example, in 1996, approximately 13.6 million railroad ties were replaced ( Railway Tie Association 1998) . These ties weighed approximately 0.7 million metric tons. If half of this wood were sound, less than 0.4 million metric tons of wood would be reco verable.

CONCLUSIONS

Woody forest residues and solid waste wood are a large, viable resource in the United States. An estimated 240 million metric tons of such material was generated in 2002. Much of this material was used to produce new products or fuel , or it was not suitable for recovery. Of the total amount generated, about 113 million metric tons (47%) was deemed suitable for further recovery for recycling or re

- use. In comparison, an estimated 248 million metric tons of roundwood timber products was produced in 2002 (excluding fuelwood). Recoverable waste wood was therefore less than half (46%) of roundwood timber production. Nearly three

fourths of the recoverable wood was in woody forest residues.

Timber harvesting and processing accounted for abo ut three

- fourths of all waste wood generated, recovered, combusted, or not usable and available for recovery in 2002. Waste wood from the logging and other removals portion of timber harvesting and processing was by far the single largest source of waste w ood available for recovery, constituting 75% of all available waste wood. Currently, nearly all of this material remains in the forest, and it contributes to excessively high levels of fuel loading. Better utilization of this material, coupled with removal

of dead and dying timber and brush, could greatly reduce fuel burdens and subsequent risk of catastrophic wildfires, while providing employment for local communities. Waste wood from C&D activities is a distant second to logging waste wood, at
about 16% o f total availability.

LITERATURE CITED

Bureau of the Census. 2004. Characteristics of new housing 2002. Current construction reports. Series C25. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC. http://www.census.gov/const/www/charindex.html#singlecompleteEPA. 1998. Characterization of building

- related construction and demolition debris in the

United States. Report No. EPA 530

- R

- 98

- 010. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC

. http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/sqg/c&d

- rpt.pdf

EPA. 2003. Municipal solid waste in the United States: 2001 Facts and figures. EPA 530

- S

03

- 011. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/non

- hw/muncpl/pubs/msw2001.pdf

Falk, Robert H.; McKeever, David B. 2004. Recovering wood for reuse and recycling: A United States pe rspective. In: Gallis, Christos Th., ed. Management of recovered wood: Recycling, bioenergy, and other options. European COST E31 conference. April 22

– 24, 2004, Thessaloniki, Greece. University Studio Press, Thessaloniki, Greece, p. 29

– 40.

Forest Service. 2004. Draft RPA 2002 Forest resource tables. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. http://ncrs2.fs.fed.us/4801/fiadb/rpa_tabler/Draft_RPA_2002 _Forest_Resource_Tables.pdf

Howard, James L. 2004. United States timber production, trade, consumption, and price
statistics 1965

– 2002. Res. Pap. FPL

– RP

– 615. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI. 90 p. http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplrp/fplrp615.pdf

McGregor, Mark; Washburn, Howard; Palermini, Debbi. 1993. Characterization of construction site waste. Final report presented to ME TRO, Solid Waste Dept., Portland, OR. July 30, 1993. 29 p.

McKeever, David B. 2002. Domestic market activity in solid wood products in the United States, 1950

– 1998. Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW

– GTR

– 524. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific North west Research Station, Portland, OR. 76 p. http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/gtr524.pdf

McKeever, David B. 2003. Inventory of woody residuals available for recovery in the United States, 2002. BioCycl

e third annual conference on renewable energy from organics recycling,
November 17

– 19, 2003, Minneapolis, MN. http://www.biocycle.net/Conferences/energy_pres_3/tuesd ay/TB1McKeever.pdf

McKeever, David B.; Skog, Kenneth E. 2003. Urban tree and woody yard residues

— Another

wood resource. Res. Note FPL

– RN

– 290. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WI. 4 p. http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplrn/fplrn290.pdf

McKeever, David B.; Falk, Robert H. 2004. Woody residues and solid waste wood available for recovery in the United States, 2002. In: Gallis, Christos Th., ed. Management of recovered wood: Recycling, bioenergy, and other options. European COST E31 conference. April 22

– 24, 2004, Thessaloniki, Greece. University Studio Press, Thessaloniki, Greece,

p 307

– 316.NEOS Corp. 1995. Urban tree residues: Results of the first national inventory. Final report

for International Society of Arboriculture Research Trust, Allegheny Power Service Corp. and National Arborists Foundation. NEOS Corp., Lakewood, CO. Sept. 1994. 65 p.

Railway Tie Association. 1998. 1998 Nort h American analysis for crosstie supply and demand. Crossties 78(6):30

– 33.

Rynk, Robert. 2004a. California fires fuel wood recycling. BioCycle Journal of Composting & Organics Recycling 45(1):22

– 24. www .biocycle.net/biocycle.htm

Rynk, Robert. 2004b. Preventing erosion while preventing fires. BioCycle Journal of Composting & Organics Recycling 45(2):48

– 52. www.biocycle.net/biocycle.htm

Solid Waste A ssociation of North America. 1993. Construction waste & demolition debris recycling. A primer. GR

– REC 300. Solid Waste Association of North America, Silver Springs, MD.

Smith, W. Brad; Vissage, John S.; Darr, David R.; Sheffield, Raymond M. 2001. Forest resources of the United States, 1997. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC

– 219. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St. Paul, MN. 190 p.Table 1. Woody residues and waste wood generated, recovered, combusted or not usable, and available

for recovery in the United States, 2002 a

Recovered, combusted, not usable

Recov

- Com

- Not

Generated ered busted usable Total Available for recovery

Source (×10 6 t) (%) (% total) (×10 6 t) (×10 6 t) (×10 6 t) (×10 6 t) (×10 6 t) (%) (% total)
Timber harvesting & processing residues
Logging & other removals residues Logging residues 66.2 71% 28%

— — 6.6 6.6 59.6 71% 53%

Other removals residues 27.2 29% 11%

— — 2.7 2.7 24.5 29% 22%

Total 93.4 100% 39%

— — 9.3 9.3 84.1 100% 75%
Primary timber processing residues

Wood residues 62.0 74% 26% 42.0 18.8

— 60.8 1.2 69% 1%

Bark residues 22.2 26% 9% 4.5 17.1

— 21.6 0.5 31% 0%

Total 84.1 100% 35% 46.5 35.9

— 82.4 1.7 100% 1%
Total, Timber harvesting &
processing 177.5

— 74% 46.5 35.9 9.3 91.8 85.8

— 76%

Urban wood waste

Construction & demolition waste

Construction waste wood 10.5 29% 4%

— — — 2.7 7.8 43% 7%

Demolition waste wood 25.2 71% 10%

— — — 14.6 10.6 57% 9%

Total 35.7 100% 15%

— — — 17.3 18.4 100% 16% Municipal solid waste
Wood component 12.0 45% 5% 1.1 2.7 2.7 6.5 5.5 63% 5%
Woody yard trimmings 14.8 55% 6% 8.5 1.5 1.6 11.6 3.2 37% 3%

Total 26.8 100% 11% 9.7 4.2 4.3 18.2 8.7 100% 8%

Total, urban wood was te 62.5

— 26% 9.7 4.2 4.3 35.5 27.1

— 24%

Total woody residues & waste wood
Logging & other removals 93.4 39% 39%

— — — 9.3 84.0 75% 75%
Primary timber processing 84.1 35% 35%

— — — 82.4 1.7 1% 1%

Construction & demolition 35.7 15% 15%

— — — 17 .3 18.4 16% 16%
Municipal solid waste 26.8 11% 11%

— — — 18.2 8.7 8% 8%

Total 240.0 100% 100%

— — — 127.2 112.8 100% 100%

a V olumes provided in metric tons

.Table 2. Wood products used and waste wood generated, recovered, combusted, or not usable, an d

available for recovery from construction in the United States, 2002

Waste wood

Generated Available for recovery

Total

wood use Amount % total Recovered, combusted,

not usable Amount Gener

ated Avail

able

Construction type (×10 6 t) (×10 6 t) use (×10 6 t) (×10 6 t) (% amt) (% amt)

Residential
Single

- family 31.8 3.4 11% 0.4 3.0 88% 39%
Multifamily 2.7 0.2 9% 0.0 0.2 88% 3%

Total, new residential 34.5 3.7 11% 0.4 3.3 88% 42%
Repair & remodeling 29.3 5.9 20% 2.1 3.8 64% 48%
Total, a ll residential 63.8 9.6 15% 2.5 7.1 74% 90%

Nonresidential
Buildings 5.3 0.6 11% 0.1 0.5 88% 6%

Other construction 1.3 0.2 13% 0.0 0.1 88% 2%
Total, new nonresidential 6.5 0.7 11% 0.1 0.6 88% 8%
Repair & remodeling 0.3 0.2 74% 0.1 0.1 71% 2%

T otal, nonresidential 6.8 0.9 14% 0.1 0.8 85% 10%

Total, all construction 70.6 10.5 15% 2.7 7.8 75% 100%2.8% 3.4% 4.3% 5.5% 5.8% 7.9% 11.1% 11.4% 12.2% 35.7%

Rubber, leather Other, misc. Textiles Glass Wood Metals Plastics Food waste Yard trimmings Paper, paperboard

Total MSW = 209 million tons

Figure 1. Components of municipal solid waste, 2002

178

63 92

36 86

27
0 50 100 150 200Million metric tons Urban wood waste

Timber harvesting & processing

Generated Recovered,

combusted,

not usable Available for

recovery

Figure 2. Waste wood generated

, recovered

, combusted or not
usable , and available for recovery in the United States, 200212

IN The Ninth International Conference on Inorganic-Bonded Composite Materials Conference,
October 10-13, 2004, Pan Pacific Hotel, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. [Moscow, ID] : University of Idaho, c2004. ( 1 CD-ROM)