Source Reduction Strategies and Technological ChangeAffecting Demand for Pulp and Paper in North America Thomas C. Marcin, Economist Irene A. Durbak, Research Forester PeterJ. Ince, Research Forester USDA Forest Service Forest Products Laboratory Madison, Wsconsin ABSTRACT The implications of source reduction strategies and technological change for pulp and paper demand in North America are described in this report. The report (1) reviews basic definitions and measures of source reduction strategies, (2) examines consumption of various grades of paper and paperboard on a per capita basis, (3) estimates potential reductions of paper and paperboard demand for various source reduction strategies, (4) describes alternative technologies related to paper use, and (5) pre­ sents projections of long-term consumption of paper and paperboard. The results indicate that volun­ tary compliance and technological change may result in a decline in paper and paperboard consump­ tion of about 10% by 2040. Imposition of disposal fees would have a similar long-term result. INTRODUCTION The volume of municipal solid waste (MSW) in the United States more than doubled during the last 30 years-from85.7 million short tons in 1960 to 197.5 million short tons in 1990. MSW increased over 50% on a per capita basis from 1.22 kg/day per person in 1960 to 1.95 kg in 1990. This is more than three-quarters of a ton per year for every person in the United States. In 1990, almost 40% of the MSW was paper and paperboard (EPA 1992). Therefore, consideration of present and future ways to manage this part of the MSW stream is critically important to an overall management strategy for MSW. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed an inte­ grated waste management system with the following hierarchy of components: (1) source reduction, (2) recycling, (3) waste combustion (with energy recovery), and (4) landfilling. In the United States, landfilling alone is no longer a feasible longterm option for waste management (EPA 1989). The pre­ ferred tool is source reduction, followed by recycling and combustion. We assessed the potential for such reduction in consumption of paper and paperboard commodi­ ties in the United States and the resulting impact on the use of pulpwood and recycled fiber. Two gen­ eral approaches were examined: (1) a voluntary approach that relies on education efforts and techno­ logical change to gradually reduce demand and (2) an approach that relies on a more direct market ac­ tion to decrease demand more rapidly, such as internalizing costs of disposal as added fees to production. These approaches are called Scenario 5A-VoluntaryActions and Scenario 5B-Internaliz­ ing Cost. A third alternative-Mandatory Standards-isdiscussed but not analyzed because it is diffi­ cult to design and unlikely to be implemented. We compared consumption of paper and paperboard on a per capita basis in the United States with that in several other industrialized countries. This provided insight into the range of long-term targets or goals that could be set for U.S. source reduction efforts. We assumed that policies encourag­ ing voluntary efforts would, in time, result in a gradual decrease in demand approaching that in other countries. Policies that include direct market intervention would probably decrease demand more quickly. For each alternative scenario, we estimated the potential decrease in projected demand over the In: What is determining international competitiveness in the global pulp and paper industry?? Proceedings of 3d International symposium; 1994 September 13-14; Seattle, WA. Seattle, WA: Center for International Trade in Forest Products; 1994: 146-164. Marcin, Durbak, and Ince 147 next few decades. This was translated into an annual decrease in the rate of growth in consumption of individual paper and paperboard commodities. This factor was then used to adjust the demand func­ tions in the North American Pulp & Paper (NAPAP) Model, which was then used to develop projec­ tions of potential reductions in the United States to the year 2040 (Ince 1994). The NAPAP Model is an economic model that simulates historical trends in paper recycling, pro­ duction technology, and pulpwood consumption from the mid-1980s to the present. It projects these trends to the year 2040, based on projected supply and demand conditions and relationships between technological change and market conditions. Results labelled "Base" refer to projections made prior to the adjustments in demand. Results la­ belled "Other Countries" refer to projections estimated for consumption of paper and paperboard commodities in selected foreign countries, taken as an average. The latter projections are used as a comparison, to evaluate the potential for the projections estimated for the United States. SOURCE REDUCTION STRATEGIES Background Source reduction is a major tool that individuals, communities, and whole societies can employ as a way to deal with waste management problems. The goal is to reduce the amount of material in the waste stream by decreasing the amount of material used in production or reducing the consumption of intermediate or end-use products. The first is a technological solution, the second is partly a cul­ tural one. The result would be not only less waste material but also less use of raw material. According to Levenson (1993), many problems associated with MSW are political and social; they need to be addressed by changing our thinking about how society uses and disposes of materials and products. One approach considers the entire lifecycle of materials, from original resource acquisition (virgin or recovered) through manufacturing, distribution and marketing, consumption, and residual management. Source reduction strategies often lack the social or economic incentives to be effective. The exter­ nal cost savings of better product design often cannot be recovered by manufacturers after their prod­ uct reaches the market. On the other hand, source reduction activities that improve the internal effi­ ciency of a manufacturing process or the marketability of a product provide businesses with an eco­ nomic incentive. Businesses may, with justification, be reluctant to support source reduction activities that reduce the demand for the goods they produce, even though society may benefit from the re­ duced generation of MSW. The amount of MSW is related to the basic tenants of modem industrial societies-consumer con­ sumption and economic growth (Levenson 1993). Consumers generally do not bear the full cost of MSW disposal or the adverse environmental impacts of modern consumer societies. Consequently, they have little incentive to consider the benefits of cost of reduced MSW generation. In addition, state and local governments have little effective regulation of manufacturing processes and products because of the national nature of most products and the restraints on regulation of interstate com­ merce. In the United States, few states have considered source reduction as a waste management goal. Ac­ cording to a national survey reported in Biocycling magazine, only two states-Massachusettsand Michigan-havespecific goals: a 10% reduction in waste over the next decade. In Europe, Germany and the Netherlands have led the way to specific source-reduction policies for packaging (Glenn 1992). Source reduction strategies need to be sensitive to concerns about loss of business and jobs in the affected industries. The Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) points out that quantity reduction for MSW could affect employment, tax revenues, and economic activity in unpredictable ways. Given these considerations, it is uncertain just how MSW reduction will be achieved in the long run (OTA 1989). It is unlikely that industry would support policies that reduce its markets. Alexander (1993) Marcin, Durbak, and Ince 148 points out some rationales for garbage as a necessary byproduct of a consumer economy and the need for considering the effects of source reduction on economic activity. No generally accepted methodology exists for quantifying and measuring source reduction (EPA 1992). Measurement of source reduction requires further definition. These definitions can be catego­ rized as follows: (1) measurement references, the date or product that serves as the measurement standard for either volume or weight, (2) reduction frequency, and (3) measurement of change or regulation. Additional considerations may include a complete life-cycle analysis of the total environ­ mental or resource impact of alternative materials. For example, a flexible drink pouch compared to a glass bottle provides a 96% reduction in packaging weight and 82% decrease in volume, even though the drink pouch is not recyclable (Dunn 1993). Thus, with better design for performance and effi­ ciency, the flexible packaging industry can use source-reducing flexible packaging systems to replace bulky single-material systems that may be recyclable. The U.S. Post Office announced that it would use plastic pallets instead of wood because they last much longer, thus reducing waste by substituting a longer-lived product. Paper and Paperboard Commodities When applied to paper and paperboard products, source reduction can mean using less fiber and other materials in the production of intermediate commodities, employing better design and utiliza­ tion in the conversion to end products, and using/needing fewer end products (lower consumption). One indication of source reduction at the level of production is lower basis weight: