Technical Assistance Program Equipment Evaluation · The plastic recycling program began in. October, 1991. The District was interested in integrating plastic recycling into the drop-off

Table of Contents

SECTION I . INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1

SECTION II . RURAL COLLECTION EQUIPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-1 FRANKLIN COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT/GREENFIELD. MASSACHUSETTS . Drop-OfRecycling Using Polypropylene Bags . . . . . . . . . 11-2

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-3 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-3 Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5 Sorting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-5 Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-7 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-7

Drop-Of Recycling Using-Expanded Metal Cage Trailers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-8 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-8 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-9 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-1 1

Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-12

NORTH COUNTRY COUNCIL/LI'ITLETON. NEW HAMPSHIRE .

Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - 11 Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-12

OZARK RECYCLING ENTERPRISES, INC./FAIRFIELD BAY, ARKANSAS - Mobile Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-14

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .II -14 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-14 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .II -15 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II- 15 Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -11-17 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-18

Stack Pak Compactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-19 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-19 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-20 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-2 1 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-21 Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-24 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I 1-24

ECOLOGY ACTION OF TEXAS, INC./AUSTIN, TEXAS .

SECTIONm-B ALERs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Manually Loaded Vertical Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Automated Rear Feeding Vertical Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Closed End Horizontal Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dual Ram Closed End Horizontal Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Open End Horizontal Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

111- 1 111- 1 111-3 111-3 111-6 111-6

MILFORD. NEW HAMPSHIRE . Automated Rear Feed Vertical Baler . . . . . . . . 111-9 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-9 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .I1 1.9 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-10 operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-11 Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-1 1 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-1 1

CONIGLIARO INDUSTRIES INC./FRAMINGHAM, MASSACHUSETTS . Automated Rear Feed Vertical Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-14

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-14 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-14 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-15 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-15 Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-17 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-18

Closed End. Single Ram. Horizontal Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-19 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-19 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-20 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-20 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-20 Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-20 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-20

NORTH COUNTRY COUNCIL/LI"LETON. NEW HAMPSHIRE .

MONMOUTH PROCESSING COMPANY/OCEAN TOWNSHIP. NEW JERSEY . Horizontal. Closed End. lbo Ram Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-23

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III-23 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-23 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-25 Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-25 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-25

SECTION IV . GRANULATORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-1 BEND (OREGON) RECYCLING TEAM . Granulator. Cyclone . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-5

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-5 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-6 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-6 operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-6 Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-7 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-7

Granulator. Hopper. Conveyor. Cyclone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-9 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-10 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-10 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-11

Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-12 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-12

GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF LANE COUNTY .

. Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-11

EDA PLASTICSKEENE. NEW HAMPSHIRE . Granutec Granulator . . . . . . . IV-14 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv-14 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv-15 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv-15 Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-15 Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-16 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV- 16

ECOLOGY ACTION OF TEXAS . Foremost HD-6 Granulator . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-17 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-17 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV- 17

Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV- 18 Equipment Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-18

Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I V-17

SECTION V . MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-1

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-2 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-2 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-2 Equipment Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-2

WEST PATERSON RECYCLING ("PAR). NEW JERSEY . Material Conveyors and Grizzly Screen

Economics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-3

Tables

Table 11-1 . Estimated Per Pound Plastic Storage and Transport Costs Using An

Table 111-1 . Frontier Recycling Systems. Inc . . Vertical Baler

Table 111-2 . Table 111-3 . Closed End Single Ram Horizontal Baler Model '4540 HS KMF

Table 111-4 . Selco 2-Ram Horizontal Baler, Model 2R-12100 Specifications . . . . . 111-24

Expanded Metal Cage Trailer Town of Whitefield. New Hampshire

Model:4600 Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-12 Ver-Tech GPI M-60HP Baler Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-16

Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-22

. . . 11-13

Figure 1 .

Figure 2 .

Figure 3 . . Expanded Steel Recycling Collection Trailer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-10

Polypropylene Waste Transportation Containers . Duffle Top

Franklin County Solid Waste Management District . Pounds of Plastic Franklin Recycling Drop-off Facility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-4

Collected Per Month . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11-6

Figure 4 . Mobile, Trailer Mounted Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II-16 Figure 5 . Ecology Action of Texas . Plastic Collection 1990-1992 . . . . . . . . . . . 11-22 Figure 6 . Stack Pak Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .XI .23 Figure 7 . Vertical Manual Feed Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-2 Figure 8 . Vertical Rear Feed Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-4 Figure 9 . Horizontal Closed End Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-5 Figure 10 . Horizontal Dual Ram Closed End Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-7 Figure 11 . Horizontal Open End Baler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111-8 Figure 12 . Granulator w/Conveyor, Cyclone & Filter Bag . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1v-2 Figure 13 . Material Conveyor and Grizzly Screen Schematic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V-4

SECTION I

INTRODUCTION

The American Plastics Council (APC) has been providing technical assistance and equipment for the recycling of plastic over the past four years as part of the APC’s Technical Assistance Program. The equipment is provided to municipalities, private businesses, and non- profit entities either to assist in starting a new plastic recycling program, or to test the applicability of different types of equipment for plastic collection or processing.

The APC contracted with DSM Environmental Services, Inc. to evaluate the performance of the equipment and associated plastic recycling programs. This report presents the results of that evaluation, and has been prepared for two audiences. First, the report is intended for use by the APC in evaluating how effective the equipment has been. Second, the report is being prepared for distribution to individuals, municipalities, and private businesses who are contemplating the purchase of specific equipment, or who are starting a plastic recycling program and want information on processing equipment that might be applicable to the particular needs of the program.

To accomplish both of the above goals, the discussion of equipment performance has been incorporated into a discussion of the recycling program in which the equipment is currently being utilized. That is because the performance of the equipment may often be directly related to the particular application in which the equipment is being used. For example, a small, manual feed vertical baler may work perfectly well for a rural area which collects and processes 1,OOO to 2,000 pounds of plastic per week. However, the same baler is likely to be inadequate for a program processing 2,000 pounds of plastic each day.

The equipment described in this report has been placed in one of four categories. These categories are: (1) rural collection equipment; (2) balers; (3) granulators; and, (4) miscellaneous equipment. Each section of the report begins with a general description of the types of equipment that are applicable to the category. The general description is then followed by a description of the evaluated programs which utilize these types of equipment. Within each program description contact names and telephone numbers for the program and for the equipment used in the program are presented, followed by a summary of the plastic program utilizing the equipment, and then a specific description of the equipment, including its performance within the program.

In all cases, equipment performance is based on information provided by contact individuals responsible for the program and by the equipment suppliers or manufacturers. While attempts were made to visit each program when the equipment was running, we were not always able to do so, and we did not conduct independent tests of the equipment.

I- 1

Finally, it should be noted that most of the equipment described in this report is used for plastic from residential sources. Therefore, equipment performance is based on post-consumer plastic bottles. Performance is likely to be different if applied to recycling plastic films or durable plastics, and may even vary if used in conjunction with commercial and institutional recycling programs.

1-2

SECTION LI

RURAL COLLECTION EQUIPMENT

The lightweight nature of plastic is one of its greatest attributes as a packaging material. Ironically, this same attribute is viewed as a drawback when programs to collect and process plastic containers are developed. This is especially the case in rural areas where the quantities of recyclables are relatively small and the distances to processors and/or markets are great.

Over the past three years, the APC has been conducting pilot collection programs around the United States to test various types of collection equipment. Most of the equipment tested in these Model Cities Programs has been for curbside collection in urban areas '. However, under a separate Technical Assistance Program (TAP) of the APC, equipment has also been provided to rural areas for the collection and/or processing of plastic containers. The equipment provided under the TAP program has been evaluated as part of this report, and includes the following:

One-cubic-yard polypropylene bags mounted on pipe racks for use in collecting and storing plastic bottles at drop-off recycling centers in rural Franklin County, Massachusetts.

0 Expanded metal cage trailers used to collect plastic bottles at drop-off recycling centers in northern New Hampshire and transport the plastic for processing at Littleton, New Hampshire.

A mobile baler mounted on a tow behind trailer for use in baling and transporting plastic bottles collected at drop-off recycling programs in rural north-central Arkansas.

0 A "stack pack" aluminum can densifyer originally intended for use as a mobile plastic baler, but now operated as a plastic densifying device at a drop-off center outside of Austin, Texas.

A detailed description of each program and the performance of the plastic handling equipment provided by the APC follows.

I See the reports prepared by the APC on each of the Model Cities for detailed information on each type of equipment tested.

11- 1

EQUIPMENT EVALUATION

Contact:

FRANKLIN COUNTY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

DROP-OFF RECYCLING USING POLYPROPYLENE BAGS

GREENFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS

Robert Rottenberg Administrator Franklin County Solid Waste Management District 324 Wells Street Greenfield, Massachusetts 01301 413-772-2438

Jonathan Lagreze Recycling Coordinator Good Works Plastic Recycling 340 Chapman Street Greenfield, Massachusetts 01301 4 13-774-3040

Equipment: Waste Wrangler I One Cubic Yard Polypropylene Bags UF Strainrite 17 Foss Road Lewiston, Maine 04240 207-777-3 100

Introduction

Sixteen towns in the Franklin County Solid Waste Management District use one-cubic- yard polypropylene bags, mounted on PVC frames to collect natural and pigmented HDPE bottles at drop-off recycling facilities. The material is collected by Good Works Plastic Recycling, an affmative industrial project sponsored by Goodwill Industries of the Springfield/Hartford area, using a 16-foot box truck and delivered to their warehouse in Greenfield. Plastic is sorted and granulated at the warehouse using Department of Mental Retardation clients. The majority of the plastic collected is HDPE, which is sold to EnviroPlastics Corporation in Auburn, Massachusetts, approximately 60 miles away.

11-2

Background

The Franklin County Solid Waste Management District is located in a rural area of north central Massachusetts. There are twenty (20) municipalities in the District. The largest is Greenfield, with a 1990 population of 18,666, and the smallest is Rowe, with a population of 378.

The plastic recycling program began in. October, 1991. The District was interested in integrating plastic recycling into the drop-off recycling programs run by the District's member municipalities. Residents of the District wanted to recycle plastic, and the municipalities did not have the capability to manage plastic recycling on their own. The concept of using polypropylene bags at the municipal drop-offs was developed by the District after looking at systems using gaylords for collecting and storing plastic.

The District contracted with Goodwill Industries to transport, process, and market the plastic bottles collected at the drop-off programs in the participating municipalities. Goodwill uses two clients supplied by the State Department of Mental Retardation and one supervisor to transport and sort the bottles.

Equipment S pecif'icat ions

The APC financed the purchase of 300 one-cubic-yard Strainrite, UV treated, woven polypropylene bags manufactured by UF Strainrite, of Lewiston, Massachusetts. The APC also financed the purchase of plastic lumber for construction of the floor of wooden sheds built to cover the bag drop-offs and to store the full bags of plastic bottles. The plastic recycling sheds are generally located at solid waste transfer and recycling facilities.

Figure 1 illustrates a recycling drop-off for plastic bottles in Franklin County. Typically, each drop-off has two bags hung on a frame constructed using 1% inch PVC waste pipe. The bags have polypropylene loops on each comer which can be slid over the pipe frame. This keeps the bags open while they are being used.

According to Junathan Lagreze, Recycling Coordinator for Good Works, a bag holds an average of 27 pounds of natural HDPE milk bottles or 45 pounds of pigmented HDPE bottles. Residents are asked to step on or otherwise crush their bottles. However, most of the bottles being sorted the day of the evaluation had not been crushed, or had expanded back to their regular shape.

When a bag is full the operator of the drop-off replaces it with an empty bag. The duffle top of the full bag is pulled closed and the bag is placed in the rear storage area of the wooden shed. This storage area can hold approximately 10 full bags.

II-3

S I D E V I E W

Storage for 10 - 12fd b@ m back-of shed Shed

I 4

c i I I I

c I

I I

I I I

I - - - - ---I I I

I i

I I

I I I I I 1 . I I I

F R O N T V I E W

Ri'Polypm&ene Waste re~ledplastic h 6 e r

containers 39" x 39" x 39" 2" Pipe Rack, 1

I

Polypropylene Waste Transportation Containers - Duffle Top

Collect ion

It takes approximately one day per week to collect bags from whichever of the 16 drop- off facilities are full that week. Normally, the two Good Works clients plus either the coordinator or the supervisor drive to the drop-offs to collect material. A box truck is used for collections. The truck can hold approximately 20 bags, so the truck is normally filled after collections at two drop-off sites.

As illustrated by Figure 2, quantities of plastic collected continue to increase as the recycling program matures. Since the program inception in the spring of 1992, monthly collections have more than doubled, from 6,300 pounds per month to a high of 15,925 pounds in November, 1993.

The current system serves 16 municipal drop-off facilities, as well as drop-offs located at three supermarkets in Greenfield.

The Town of Montague collects recyclables curbside and has recently added natural and pigmented HDPE plastic bottles to the curbside program. The polypropylene bags are hung on the side of the curbside collection vehicle and the plastic bottles thrown into the bag. When the bag is full it is closed, removed from the truck and left on the side of the road. The Montague highway department then picks up the bags and brings them to a storage location where they are collected by Goodwill. Montague expects the use of bags to be a temporary solution until a plastic compactor can be added to the recycling truck.

sorting

It takes approximately four days per week to sort and process the plastic bottles. At the processing facility bags are manually lifted up and dumped into a plywood bin. The bottles are then raked out of the bin onto a sorting platform where the two workers remove contaminants, including all caps, as well as bottles made from other resins. Cleaned and sorted natural and HDPE bottles are currently pushed off the sorting platform and into a hopper which feeds a small granulator. The granulated plastic is stored at the warehouse until a sufficient quantity is available of each type of plastic to fill the collection truck.

Until June of 1993 when Good Works started using a granulator, the sorted plastic was hauled to Orange, Massachusetts for baling. A truck load of 20 bags of loose bottles would make one bale.

II-5

FIGURE 2 b

Franklin County Solid Waste Management District

Pounds of Plastic Collected Per Month

FY 93-94 PLASTICS COLLECTION PROGRAM WEIGHT BY MONTH

17

16

15

l 4

,’ w

14,_330 -* / ? , - 13,125 ; -

i i e3 v: l 3 1 3 5 r ‘j 12 1- - e l & D m !Q&Q ,/

I 11 +-- 10 p:!!-*-/

/i ; * A 9,80p?8J!,~~ -1 \ / ’ \ I

\ I

---- 8?95 I

9 i 1

JULY SEPT NOV JAN MAR MAY JULY SEPT NOV 8 l - 1 I I I I I I 1

I I I 1 I I I I

AUG OCT DEC FEB APR ,TUN A4UGLJS OCT DEC

II-6

During August, 19i3 the District and Good Works expanded the list of acceptable plastics to include all plastic containers, as well as injection molded HDPE containers, and polystyrene containers. One additional bag was added at each drop-off location for the new plastics. Good Works sorts them at the warehouse. This expansion will initially be for a six month period to test the feasibility of collecting and marketing this material.

Economics

The District pays Good Works between $650 and $750 per month to collect and process the material. The actual cost depends on the quantity of material collected. Based on current collection rates of 13,000 to 15,000 pounds per month, the cost per pound to collect and process the material is between 5 and 6 cents per pound. However, Good Works’ costs are subsidized by the State Department of Mental Retardation, so actual costs are higher.

v

The bags are currently 18 months old. They become soiled, primarily by laundry detergent and require washing approximately every 6-9 months. The cost of washing at a commercial laundry is approximately $2.50 per bag, or $90 per 36 bags.

As part of the expansion, the District recently requested bids for new bags. Strainrite bid $21.75 per bag and one competitor, King Bag Company, bid $15.50 per bag. The King Bags are thinner than the Strainrite bags, rated at 1,500 pound stretch test as opposed to the 2,000 pound rathg of the Strainrite bags. The District selected Strainrite to supply the new bags.

Equipment Performance

The District and Good Works are pleased with the way the bag program has worked. Given Good Works’ subsidies and the need to utilize people with disabilities, the bags appear to be an effective method of collecting, storing, and transporting the plastic bottles.

Good Works hopes to increase collection efficiency by using a compactor truck to transport the bags. However, there is concem that the bags will tear during the compaction process.

Many of the bags are now wearing thin and developing holes in the bottom of the bags. Part of the reason for this is that some of the bags were originally set up out-side at the drop- offs, and stored on gravel surfaces. Good Works hopes that now that they are stored inside, bottom wear will be decreased.

11-7


NORTH COUNTRY COUNCIL

DROP-OFF RECYCLING USING EXPANDED METAL CAGE TRAILERS

LITTLETON, NEW HAMPSHIRE

Contact:

Equipment:

Marghie Seymour Solid Waste Planner North Country Council 65 Main Street Littleton, New Hampshire 603-444-6303

Tony Ilacqua Littleton Transfer and Recycling Manager Town Office Littleton, New Hampshire 603-444- 1447

13.3 Cubic Yard Expanded Metal Cage Trailers Four Seasons Recycling

Introduction

The North Country Council (Council) is a regional planning and development organization serving towns in northern New Hampshire. The Council has been working with its member towns to develop solid waste management plans that comply with New Hampshire regulations governing the closure of unlined landfills.

The Council determined that there was a public demand for plastic recycling, and that its member towns did not have the capacity to handle plastics. Therefore, approximately two years ago the Council began soliciting funds for development of a plastic collection and processing system. The concept was that towns with drop-off recycling centers would acquire trailers for residents to deposit their plastic milk jugs and soda bottles into. The trailers would be hauled to a new recycling drop-off, storage and processing facility being developed by the Town of Littleton, in conjunction with closure of their landfill.

11-8

Background

The Council received $36,000 in funding for the new plastic recycling program. Ten thousand dollars each were provided by: the APC, New Hampshire the Beautiful, and the Governors Recycling Program. Five hundred dollars each were provided by: Butsons Supermarket, Lotta Rock Dairy, Consumat Sanco Landfill, and American Waste Systems. Finally, the Farmers Home Administration provided $4,000 to fund part of the Council’s management and administrative functions associated with the project.

~ ~

The Council purchased a used horizontal baler, loading hopper, and sorting/loading conveyor for $23,000 from Resource Technology Corporation (see Section I11 for a description of the baler performance). The baler was given to the Town of Littleton. In return for the baler, Littleton agreed to construct and operate an intermediate processing facility and allow any of the 23 towns served by the Council to deliver plastic milk and soda bottles free of charge until 1997. Littleton would be responsible for baling and marketing the material.

The Council also acquired five 13.3 cubic yard expanded metal cage trailers from Four Seasons Recycling of Pennsylvania (Figure 3). Each of the original towns wanting to participate in the plastic recycling program was given the opportunity to purchase a trailer from the Council for $1500, with the Council paying the remaining $500 cost of the trailer. Five towns purchased the trailers. However, the town of Lancaster has subsequently decided not to use the trailer but instead to bale plastic at their own recycling facility.

The four other participating towns and Littleton began accepting plastic at their drop-off centers during the winter or spring of 1993. The towns and populations are: Littleton, 5,800; Bethlehem, 2,000; Whitefield, 1,600; Monroe, 740; and, -01, 530. The town of Dalton, population 830, is currently considering acquiring a trailer and beginning plastic recycling.

When a trailer fills, the town is responsible for hauling the trailer to the Littleton recycling center, unloading the trailer, and assuring that there are only plastic milk jugs and soda bottles. The plastic from each town was stored at the recycling facility until June, when Littleton began baling the material.

Littleton is only required to accept plastic milk jugs and PET soda bottles from the participating towns. However, Littleton accepts all bottles coded with a 1,2,3,5, or 7 from its own residents, and may eventually allow the other participating towns to deliver additional plastics.

Littleton markets its plastic through the co-operative marketing program of the New Hampshire Resource Recovery Association (NHRRA) Concord, New Hampshire. The NHRRA currently has a contract with R2B2 of Connecticut for hauling and processing of plastic bottles coded 1,2,3,5, and 7. When Littleton has a trailer load of plastic bales, R2B2 will arrange for transportation to their processing facility.

________

II-9

+

I S I D E V I E W

( 14'- 0" 1

1 t 8'- 0"

B A C K V I E W

8'- 0"

6'- 0" m

Expanded S tee1 Recycling Collection Trailer I

Until the new horizontal baler became operational, Littleton was baling plastic using an old vertical manual feed baler. The plastic had to be fed by hand. According to Tony Ilacqua, Littleton Recycling Manager, it would take between 8 and 12 hours to produce one bale, given both the time required to manually load the baler, and the need to keep the bale compressed in between strokes of the platen so that the plastic would not spring back.

Equipment Specifications

The trailers purchased by the Council were onginally designed for collection of aluminum cans. The trailers were sized for hauling aluminum cans to just avoid the gross vehicle weight requirement for trailer brakes, which would add significantly to the cost of the trailer, as well as limit the vehicles which could tow it. The trailers are 10 feet long by 6 feet wide by 6 feet high.

A cubic yard of aluminum cans weighs approximately double that of a cubic yard of mixed plastic milk and soda bottles on an uncompacted basis. Therefore, the trailer size could be increased for use with plastic bottles without requiring trailer brakes.

The company manufacturing the trailers has subsequently gone out of business according to Marghie Seymour of the Council. However, the Council has located a local welder willing to fabricate similar trailers. A trailer was recently fabricated for Lincoln, New Hampshire. It will be sixteen feet long to take advantage of the weight differential between plastic bottles and aluminum.

Operations

Littleton does not weigh the trailers when they are brought to the facility. However, given an average density of approximately 35 to 40 pounds per cubic yard for uncompacted plastic bottles, the 13.3 cubic yard trailers will hold between 460 and 530 pounds of plastic bottles.

The trailers were fabricated with a rear unloading door split in thirds. The bottom three feet, extending all the way across the rear of the trailer, swings down, like a truck tail gate. The upper half of the door is split in half vertically, like a barn door, with each half swinging to the side.

The problem with this rear door arrangement is that it is difficult to compartmentalize the trailer so that PET soda bottles can be stored in one part of the trailer and natural HDPE milk jugs in another part of the trailer. A better design would be to have the entire back door split in half vertically, with a vertical, movable partition front to back separating the two compartments in the trailer.

Loading of the trailer can be accomplished either through the back or from the top. Splitting the rear doors both vertically and horizontally would allow for easier loading from the

rear until bottles started to fall over the top of the lower door. It would then be necessary to load from the top, which requires some type of platform or steps.

Storage of plastic outside in the sun is not recommended for long periods of time. Therefore, one consideration with the trailers is how long it will take to fill them. For example, the town of Monroe, with only 740 people, must store plastic approximately two months outside before they have a full load. This is sufficiently long so that some degradation of the plastic has O C C U K ~ ~ by the time the plastic is delivered for baling.

Economics

The Council has received prices of approximately $2,300 for local fabrication of trailers similar to the ones currently in use. .Data on operating costs are not available from the participating municipalities. However, rough costs estimates can be developed assuming an average lifetime of seven years. Annual ownership costs are then approximately 430 dollars per year. Annual maintenance costs of an additional 200 dollars is a reasonable assumption. Finally, costs of 50 cents per mile for round trip hauling of the trailer can be expected. Based on observations at the Littleton facility, it takes two people approximately one hour to unload the full trailer, which adds to the labor associated with driving from the drop-off to the unloading facility. Table 11-1 illustrates estimated costs per pound for the participating municipality of Whitefield to utilize the trailer. Costs will obviously vary from municipality to municipality depending on how long it takes to accumulate a load of plastic and how far the municipality is from the processing facility.


The towns using the trailers appear to be happy with their performance. Problems include:

e Length of storage of plastic bottles in sunlight, depending on the fill rate at the drop off;

e The need to throw bottles over the top of the trailer, which is eight feet high, once the trailer is approximately one-half full;

e The length of time required to manually unload the trailer;

e Limited load capacity for larger drop-offs; and,

e Limited flexibility in accommodating additional plastic resin types.

11-12

Table II-1

Estimated Per Pound Plastic Storage and Transport Costs Using An Expanded Metal Cage Trailer

Town of Whitefield, New Hampshire *

Amortized Capital Cost $ 430.00

Annual Operating and Maintenance Costs Maintenance Estimated Insurance

200.00 100.00

Transport (15 tripdyear @ 20 miles round trip) 150.00

Labor (@ 2 hours/trip) 390.00

Total Cost $ 1,270.00

Estimated Annual Delivery (Pounds) 7,425

Per Pound Cost (Cents) 0.17

* Costs estimated based on 7 months of data

11- 13


OZARK RECYCLING ENTERPRISES,' INC.

MOBILE BALER, FAIRFIELD BAY, ARKANSAS

Contact: Sandy Garcia, Director Ozark Recycling Enterprize, Inc HC 79 Box 271A Marshall, Arkansas 501-448-2472

Joe kcshank, Baler Operator HC 79, Box 264 Marshall, Arkansas

Harold Hippe, Recycling Coordinator 174 Burnt Rock Falls Rd. Fairfield Bay, Arkansas 72088 501 -884-6 156

Equipment: Model 24 Cram-A-Lot Baler J. V. Manufacturing, Inc. Box 229 Springdale, Arkansas 72765 501-75 1-7774

Introduction

During 1992 the North Central Arkansas Landfill Authority contracted with Ozark Rezycling to collect plastic bottles from six drop-off recycling programs in municipalities using the Authority's landfill. The Authority received a grant from the State for purchase of a one ton truck. The APC provided funds for a mobile baler and trailer.

Background

Ozark Recycling is a non-profit organization formed in 1988 to promote recycling in an approximately 75 square mile area of northern Arkansas. During 1991 they began a cooperative marketing program for recycled plastic bottles. Ozark Recycling contracts with Gulf National Trading Copration, Vancouver, Washington, which brokers bales of plastic produced by members of the Cooperative.

The drop-offs serviced using the mobile baler are located in Fairfield Bay, the site where it was observed in operation, Russellville, Bull Shoals, Searcy County, and Heber Springs,

11-14

Arkansas. The sixth program now has a permanent baling facility.

The mobile baling program began collecting plastic in July, 1992. Approximately 30,000 pounds of plastic bottles were collected during the first year of the program. Plastics collected are natural HDPE and PET bottles (custom and soda). A small amount of pigmented HDPE is also collected.

~

Ozark Recycling drives the baler to each drop-off when a sufficient amount of plastic bottles have been collected at the drop-off to produce a full truck load of bales. Bales produced with the mobile baler are hauled to Marshall, Arkansas, Ozark Recycling headquarters, and stored in a tractor trailer supplied by Mid America Recycling, Inc., Joplin, Missouri. It is a 70 to 100 mile round trip drive to the drop-offs from Marshall.


Figure 4 illustrates the Model 24 Cram-A-Lot baler mounted on a trailer. Of particuiar note is that the Cram-A-Lot Baler was not specifically designed as a "mobile" baler, but as a small stationary baler. For this particular application it has been mounted to a 12-foot flat bed, steel, tow behind trailer, making it mobile.

The baler is 65 inches high, with the single ram cylinder extending another 33 inches above the baler. Including the height to the floor of the trailer, the top of the ram cylinder is approximately 10 feet above the ground.

The 25" by 20" feed opening and 24" by 18" bale hopper size allow more plastic bottles to be fed to the machine at one time than a standard on-board plastic compactor. However, Ozark Recycling still found that loading the baler with a trash can full of plastic bottles was too slow. Therefore they designed a pivoting plywood hopper into which the bottles can be dumped for tipping and raking into the baler.

The baler used by Ozark Recycling requires three phase power, which limits its use as a mobile baler to drop-off locations serviced by three phase power. According to Cram-A-Lot representatives the baler can be set up to run on 230 volt single phase power. However, this increases the cost of the Model 24 baler by approximately 2,000 dollars. In addition, energy consumption could be expected to nearly double.

Operations

The baler produces an 18 by 24 by 20 inch bale weighing approximately 105 pounds for natural HDPE bottles or 90 pounds for PET bottles. Bale density is approximately 567 pounds per cubic yard for natural HDPE and 486 pounds per cubic yard for PET bottles.

II-15

B A L E R

I r

T-R A I L E R

Baler

/ R A L E R A S S E M B L Y

Loading Hopper

f 14'- 0" 9

Mobile, Trailer Mounted Baler

The one ton truck with a flat bed can hold up to 19 bales, with an additional six stored on the trailer with the baler. It takes approximately 30 to 40 minutes to produce the bale when loading HDPE and approximately 20 to 30 minutes when producing a PET bale. Of this time, approximately six minutes is spent manually tieing the bale, discharging it from the baler, and moving the bale to the truck. The remaining time is spent loading the baler and cycling the baler. The platen cycle time is 22 seconds. It takes another approximately 22 seconds to open the charging door, rake plastic bottles in, close and latch the door and start the baling prwss. - ~

The design of the baler makes it infeasible to load continuously because with the platen fully extended, plastic would pile up on top of the platen, jamming the baler. As with most equipment used to densify plastic containers, development of an adequate feed mechanism for the plastic is essential. In this case it was necessary for the Ozark Recycling to develop a plywood feed hopper which could be used to dump plastic bottles into the baler. Similar arrangements would be necessary wherever the baler is used for plastic bottles.

While it is possible for one person to load and run the baler, it is much more efficient using two people, with one person loading plastic into the plywood feed hopper and the second raking the plastic into the baler and running the baler. The 100 pound weight of the bales also makes it easier to have two people running the baler. It is possible for a single strong person to move the bales. However, two people are required if the bale needs to be lifted or moved any distance.

Economics

The capital cost of the baler, set up to run on three phase power is $4,860 plus shipping. Cram-A-Lot custom mounted the baler on the trailer for Ozark Recycling, and is willing to do the Same for other customers. The cost of mounting on a 12 by 6 foot trailer with four comer jack stands is $1,500. Costs of the tow behind trailer will vary, but are estimated to be approximately $1,500.

Ozark Recycling keeps accurate records of operating costs associated with the mobile baling program. Based on costs over the first year of operation, Ozark Recycling estimates that it costs 20 cents per pound to drive to the drop-offs, bale the plastic and haul the plastic bales back to the storage trailer in Marshall. These costs are exclusive of amortization of capital costs and administrative costs, but do include labor and labor overhead, truck fuel and maintenance, and baler wire! and maintenance.

Ozark Recycling has a verbal commitment to receive 5 cents per pound for the baled plastic FOB Marshall, Arkansas, where the trailer is kept. Ozark Recycling does not pay a rental fee for use of the trailer to store plastic bales.

11- 17

According to Sandy Garcia of Ozark Recycling, the cost of operating the baler would be reduced if the baler were used in a more densely populated area with shorter travel times between drop-off locations. Currently they are servicing drop-offs as much as 100 miles from Marshall.


Ozark Recycling had some initial problems with the baler. Cram-A-Lot had to replace a bad hydraulic pump, and the baler was originally incorrectly wired. The hydraulic fittings on the platen also leak if left in the down position for any length of time, so that the plastic bale will rebound about five inches.

The baler has several potential uses. First, it would be ideal for a medium sized residential recycling drop-off where there was a need to consolidate plastics to reduce transport costs. It could also serve well for a large commercial or institutional activity which generated a sufficient quantity of plastic and other recyclable material. Second, the baler appears to work well as a mobile baler, although, as described above, it would work best in an area which had a number of drop-off locations within a reasonable distance.

11- 18


ECOLOGY ACTION OF TEXAS, INC.

Contact:

Equipment:

STACK PAK COMPACTOR

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Scott Beaver, Executive Director Ecology Action of Texas, Inc. 210 Industrial Blvd. #B Austin, Texas 78745 5 12-326-9396

Model 611 X Geo, Stack Pak Compactor Aluminum Recycling Company 9945 West 25th Avenue fakewood, Colorado 80215 303-233-6922

Introduction'

Ecology Action was formed in 1970 as a volunteer organization for recycling. Over the years the organization has expanded, operating at one time as many as 13 drop-off recycling centers. Currently material is collected from eight drop-off centers scattered around Austin and the adjoining municipalities.

The APC provided Ecology Action with a Stack-Pak Compactor in 1991. The Stack-Pak was originally intended as a mobile baler/compactor. The intent was to mount the Stack-Pak on a trailer and bring it to each drop-off center, where the plastic would be densified, then loaded into 55-gallon plastic drums and hauled back to the processing center together with other recyclables.

After reviewing the logistics of moving and loading the Stack-Pak, Ecology Action determined that the height and weight of the Stack-Pak, together with the'height of the loading door, presented significant limitations to mounting it on a trailer. As an alternative to using the compactor as a mobile baler, Ecology Action determined that it would be very useful for densifying plastic at one of its more heavily used drop-off facilities. Therefore, the compactor was permanently placed at the Round Rock recycling center, 20 miles from Ecology Action's processing facility. This center is located at an AutoTech automobile service center.

Background information taken from Ecology Action reports.

11-19

Auto Tech is a privately owned "environmentally friendly" auto service center which collects and recycles waste oils, batteries, antifreeze and air conditioning freon, both from their own customers, and from do-it-yourselfers. The owners, Bud and Leslie Lewis, felt that offering drop-off recycling services for residential recyclables would be a logical addition to the service center. Therefore, they made an arrangement with Ecology Action to locate the recycling drop- off at the auto service center. Employees of AutoTech staff the drop-off and compact the plastic using the Stack-Pak on an as needed basis.

-~

Background

Ecology Action opened a warehouse for processing and storing collected recyclables in the mid 1970's. In mid 1989, PET soda bottles and natural HDPE milk bottles were added to some of Ecology Actions drop-off programs to determine public interest in plastics recycling. Public response was great, with the volume of plastic soon exceeding all other materials collected by Ecology Action.

In August of 1990, Ecology Action opened its first plastic recycling center, accepting soda bottles, milk jugs, and pigmented HDPE. Financial assistance for the center was provided by Chevron Chemical Company.

The plastics program was continued into 1991, with support from Chevron and new contributions from the Exxon Companies, Occidental Petroleum, and Ammo Chemical Company. This support, and the provision of the Stack-Pak compactor by the APC, led Ecology Action to establish a second plastics recycling station in Round Rock, 20 miles north of Austin. The opening ceremony, at which the Stack-Pak was unveiled, was attended by Texas Land Commissioner Garry Mauro and Texas Senator Parker McCullough. Representatives of Chevron Chemical and H.E.B. Grocery were also present, and the event was covered extensively by Austin and Round Rock media.

In August 1991 Ecology Action installed a used Foremost Granulator, also provided by the APC, at its processing facility in Austin. This machine was dedicated to processing milk jugs.

In 1992, Ecology Action found a market for LDPE and PP, and began collecting this material. Ecology Action also opened a new recycling center adjacent to an H.E.B. supermarket at the Hancock Shopping Center in central Austin.

The fence surrounding the new recycling center is constructed with 100% post-consumer recycled plastic lumber. The collection bins for plastics are also 100% recycled post-consumer plastic. The center is also the first to have a full-time staff person assigned to it to educate its users. In addition, the recycling center is heavily promoted by the adjacent supermarket, which has promotional posters placed throughout the store. Finally, it was the first recycling center in central Texas to accept post-consumer polystyrene food-packaging as an integral part of a recycling program. Storage containers for this material are provided by Ecology Action and

___-

XI-20

Dolco Packaging. provided by Dolco Packaging.

Collection bags and back-hauling of the undensified polystyrene is also

Ecology Action collected and processed 150,000 pounds of post-consumer plastic during 1992, up from approximately 18,000 pounds during 1989 and 38,000 pounds during 1991 (see Figure 5).


The Stack-Pak compactor is six feet tall, with a single ram cylinder extending another three feet (Figure 6). The compactor stands on legs, allowing the compacted "bricks" of material to be discharged underneath the compaction chamber.

The hydraulic pump on the Ecology Action Stack-Pak is run by a small Honda gasoline fueled engine with an automatic electric start. Therefore, it is not necessary to have electric power at the point of use. The Stack-Pak is similar in design to the Cram-A-Lot baler used by Ozark Recycling except that it does not have provisions for tieing the compacted material to produce a bale and the material is discharged from underneath the machine instead of from the front of the machine. When used for aluminum cans, compaction is sufficient so that the cans tend to "lock" together forming a cube which can be moved and stored. The same concept works for natural HDPE but is only partially effective for pigmented HDPE.

Operations

According to Chris Rundberg, an employee of AutoTech, the Stack-Pak is run approximately two hours per day, five days per week. Natural and pigmented HDPE bottles and PET bottles are deposited by residents in 55 gallon drums located in an enclosed trailer adjacent to the service center. AutoTech employees carry the drums into the service center where the Stack-Pak is located and dump the plastic into the Stack-Pak. When the Stack-Pak is empty it will take a charge of uncompacted plastic approximately equal to three quarters of a 55 gallon drum. Each charge takes less plastic because the compaction chamber is filling.

Cycle time associated with opening the charging door, dumping in plastic, and cycling the ram is approximately one minute, with actual ram cycle time being 52 seconds, given the hydraulic flow rate associated with this particular machine.

It takes between four and six 55 gallon drums of uncompacted plastic bottles to make one drum of compressed plastic. The one drum of compressed plastic consists of three "bricks" of plastic which have been unloaded from the bottom of the compactor. It takes one man approximately 30 to 60 minutes to crush the four to six drums of plastic bottles.

11-2 1

l60,OoO

9 -- PETE - DYED HDPE

- *- NAT. HDPE - TOTAL.

- 140,000

120,000

100,000

B 2 3 80,000

40.000

20,000

0

FIGURE 5

ECOLOGY ACTION OF TEXAS

Plastic Collection 1990-1992

,

1990 1 1991 199

FIGURE 6

W

Q

n o -'9 4

11-23

Ll Q)

Ecology Action does not weigh the material received from the Round Rock collection center when it is delivered to the processing facility. However, on the day of the site visit one 55 gallon drum each of compressed natural HDPE, pigmented HDPE, and PET bottles was weighed. Based on this one sample, rough compaction ratios were determined as follows:

MATERIAL LOOSE DENSFY’ COMPRESSED DENSITY COMPACTION RATIO

PET Soda

HDPE Natural

HDPE Pigmented

(PoundsICubic Yard)

40 185

30 128

45 78

4.511

4.2511

1.711

Economics

The capital cost of the reconditioned, used, Stack-Pak baler was $14,300, delivered. Neither Auto Tech or Ecology Action keep separate records of the cost associated with compacting the material or transporting and processing the material.


The Stack-Pak baler is very similar in size to the Cram-A-Lot baler used by Ozark Recycling Enterprises in Arkansas. The biggest differences are: (1) it does not provide a way to tie the material; and, (2) has a relatively small discharge, opening to the underside of the compactor. Because the discharge is to the underside of the baler, the baler must be elevated on legs, while the Cram-A-Lot baler can sit flat. The plastic bottles do not lock together as well as the aluminum cans. Therefore, the brick of plastic bottles produced by the Stack-Pak tends to break apart somewhat when the baler is unloaded. More importantly, since the bricks of plastic are not tied, they expand once placed back in the 55 gallon drums, making it difficult to remove the plastic once it is brought back to the processing facility.

If one were to choose a mobile baler, the Cram-A-Lot would be a more likely choice. However, in both cases it might be better to select an on board truck compactor. A primary problem with both of the mobile balers tested is that the feed opening is not very large, and the cycle time is relatively slow, requiring a substantial amount of time to densify the plastic. In addition, both balers are fairly tall, which makes them somewhat unstable when mounted on a trailer.

How To ImDlement A Plastics Recvcline Program, Estimated Recovery Levels of Plastic Resin in a Curbside Program, The Council For Solid Waste Solutions, Washington, D.C., 1991

11-24

SECTION III

BALERS

The primary purpose of baling plastic containers is to densify the material sufficiently to minimize storage space at the processing facility, and maximize the amount of plastic that can be legally shipped to a buyer. Ideally, the bale size and weight will be such that a fully loaded tractor trailer will contain the maximum amount of plastic allowed under the highway vehicle weight restrictions.

There are four basic types of balers used to bale plastic containers. These include:

Manually loaded vertical balers

Automated rear feeding vertjcal balers

Single and dual ram closed end horizontal balers

0 Open end horizontal balers

A general description of each of these baler types is presented belod, followed by a description of the programs evaluated using each of these types of equipment.

Manually Loaded Vertical Baler

In a standard vertical baler, the material is manually loaded into the baling chamber through a front gate (Figure 7). Once the material inside the baler reaches the top of the lower door, the front gate is manually closed and the operator pushes a button to start the compaction cycle. The platen moves down compacting the material, and then returns to its top position. The operator can now begin loading material again by opening the loading gate. Cycle time varies between balers but ranges from 30 to 60 seconds. Some balers have a feature that allows this loading gate to be opened by the platen in its upward travel. .

Typically, approximately one cubic yard or one gaylord of plastic bottles can be loaded into the bale chamber when the baler is first being filled. However, as more baled material builds up in the bale chamber, the amount of plastic containers which can be loaded between cycles decreases, eventually to less than one-half a gaylord. The decreasing amount of material that can be loaded between cycles as the baler chamber fills significantly increases the amount of time necessary to produce a bale of plastic. This is especially a problem for plastics with strong "memories" such as PET or thicker walled HDPE bottles which tend to spring back as the platen is raised.

Background information supplied by Sergio Firpo, Frontier Recycling Systems.

111- 1

FIGURE 7

111-2

Once the bale chamber is completely filled and the bale completed, the operator lowers the platen by pushing the down button and opens the lower door. The operator inserts wires into the wire channels at the bottom and top of the bale and ties them off. The bale is ejected by connecting two chains to the platen at the back of the baler and raising the platen by pressing the up button.

The baler is now ready to start a new bale. This complete cycle takes from one to two hours depending on the design of the baler, the size of the bale, type of plastic, and desired bale density. It should be noted, however, that the complete cycle can take as long as six to eight hours if the platen is left down between compaction cycles long enough to minimize "spring- back" of the plastic, and thus maximize bale density.

-

Automated Rear Feeding Vertical Baler

An automated rear feeding baler (Figure 8) consists of a loading hopper, feeding conveyor, an optional flattener-perforator, and a vertical baler with a rear feed hopper. Plastic containers are continuously loaded into the receiving hopper, conveyed into the flattener/perforator and dropped into the rear hopper and then into the baling chamber when the platen is raised.

The system is fully automated. A photo-electric sensor in the baling chamber controls the compacting platen and the feeding conveyor. When the material inside the baler fills the chamber, the feeding conveyor automatically stops, and the platen completes a compression cycle. The conveyor then automatically starts when the platen reaches its top position. This cycle continues until a completed bale of preset size is finished. At this time the platen stops in the lower position and a light signals the operator that a full bale is ready to be tied. The bales are manually tied and ejected as in the standard vertical baler.

Closed End Horizontal Baler

Closed end horizontal balers compact the material horizontally against a closed discharge door (Figure 9). In rough terms, a horizontal baler is like a vertical baler lying on its side with the feeding chamber facing up. These balers are normally fitted with manual tieing of the wires for cost reasons.

Material is frequently loaded with a conveyor into the baling chamber until a sensor triggers the ram to cycle. The ram (platen) compresses the material and returns to the initial position. This cycle continues until the baler senses a full bale. The operator then ties the wires and opens the baler door to eject the bale. The wires for the next bale are then fed into place. Since the full stroke of the ram is not sufficient to eject the bale, material for the next bale is used to push the finished bale out of the chamber. At this point the bale is removed, and after closing the door, the baler is ready to continue with the next bale.

_______

In-3

FIGURE 8

III-4

FIGURE 9

&-

,IO -'9

-

b

III-5

Dual Ram Closed End Horizontal Baler

One problem with the closed end single ram horizontal balers is that using the untied, partially baled material to push the tied bale out of the bale chamber generally results in loose unbaled material spilling out at the same time. This material must be picked up and thrown back into the baler. This problem can be eliminated using a dual ram closed end baler (Figure 10). These balers have a second ram mounted adjacent to the bale chamber and perpendicular to the baling ram. This second ram is used to discharge the tied bale sideways out of the bale chamber. Dual ram balers can also be used in tight spaces where it is infeasible to eject or move a bale using a single ram baler.

Open End Horizontal Baler

Open end automatic tie horizontal balers (Figure 11) are used for high production rates since they can complete a bale in about ten minutes. The operation of this type of baler is similar to the closed end baler, except that the baler ram uses the previous bale to compact the material. The previous bale is held in the extrusion chamber by the pressure of the side walls. When the bale reaches a preset bale length, the bale wires are automatically tied. Finished bales am ejected onto a ramp as the ram continues to compact new material. Automatic tie balers generally cannot be set up to use more than one wire per channel for tieing.

111-6

Figure 10

III-7

Incline Conveyor

Compaction Chamb*r L

I I1 u 11 \\ U

31'- 0" >

P Pres Channel

1 Horizontal Open End Baler I


MILFORD, NEW HAMPSHIRE

AUTOMATED REAR FEED VERTICAL BALER

Contacts: Robert Courage, Public Works Director Tammy Scott, Supervisor - Solid Waste Transfer Station Milford Town Office Milford, New Hampshire (603) 673- 1662

Equipment: Model FP 26, Automated Feed Vertical Baler with pedorator/flattener Frontier Recycling Systems 4600 W. Chicago Avenue Chicago, Illinois (3 12) 626-0050

Introduction

The APC provided funding for installation of an automated rear feed vertical baler at the Milford recycling facility. This equipment is used to bale natural and pigmented HDPE bottles and PET soda bottles delivered by Milford residents.

Background

The Milford recycling facility was developed in 1990 using an existing 40-foot by 70-foot town-owned building at the Milford transfer station. The facility was conceived and originally designed by Craig Casserino, a local recycler. The concept was to accept commingled recyclables from residents using the Milford transfer station, sort the material using a conveyor, then densify and market the sorted material.

Shortly after the recycling facility became operational, Craig Casserino sold the facility to Consumat-Sanco, a landfill company attempting to diversify into recycling. Consumat-Sanco entered into a contract with Milton to process Milton's recyclables and a separate contract with Derry, New Hampshire for processing of recyclables in addition to Milford's. Consumat-Sanco requested assistance from the APC in acquiring equipment to densify plastic bottles.

According to Robert Courage, Milford Public Works Director, the facility was too small to handle the combined recyclables from Milford and Deny. Therefore, the Town of Milford bought out Consumat-Sanco's interests in the facility in May of 1992. Changes were made to eliminate the problems associated with the facility, and acceptance of recyclables from outside

111-9

of Milford was stopped.

Milford, with a population of 12,000, has a mandatory source separation ordinance which requires all users of the transfer station to separate recyclables from the remaining waste. According to Robert Courage, the majority of commercial and industrial waste is collected privately and hauled directly to disposal facilities, thus avoiding the separation requirement.

_____

~

The recycling facility currently includes a glass crusher and can flattener in addition to the plastic baling equipment. Paper is separately sorted and then moved to the building housing the transfer station where it is baled in a separate baler.

From January through May of 1993 the processing facility received the following:

Material

UNP occ Magazines Aluminum Steel cans Glass

Flint Green Brown

Plastics HDPE PET

Quantity (tons) 27.8 16.5 2.3 2.9 6.8

20.3 13.6 9.5

3.9 2.9

Total 106.6


The Milford facility is equipped with a Frontier Recycling Systems, Inc. 2646 Plastics Baling System. This consists of a loading hopper, incline feed conveyor, flattener/perforator, and rear feed vertical baler.

Plastic containers are continuously loaded into the receiving hopper, conveyed into the flattener/perforator and dropped into the baling chamber. A photo-electric sensor in the baling chamber controls the compacting platen and the feeding conveyor. When the material inside the baler fills the chamber, the feeding conveyor automatically stops, and the platen completes a compression cycle. The conveyor then automatically starts when the platen reaches its top position. This cycle continues until a completed bale of a preset size is finished. At this time, the platen stops in the lower position and a light signals the operator that a full bale is ready to

III- 10

be tied. The bales are tied and ejected as in the standard vertical baler.

The Frontier baling system, including the feed conveyor takes a floor space of five by Table 111-1 provides baler 26 feet, and requires a ceiling height of at least 13 feet.

specifications.

Operations

As currently configured, commingled recyclables are dropped off by Milford residents at a large "window" counter. Up to three recycling facility employees sort the material into gaylords as the resident waits. Plastic bottles are placed in gaylords, by resin type. The gaylords are stored until a sufficient quantity has been accumulated to produce a bale of a specific resin type.

The gaylords of plastic bottles are moved by forklift or by hand to the sorting building and dumped on the baler feed conveyor. When a complete bale has been produced it is manually tied using two wires at each of the six ties. Currently Milford produces one bale of plastic per day.

According to Tammy Scott, sorting and baling plastic bottles take about 50 percent of the labor time spent on all bottles and cans.

Economics

Current capital costs for the Frontier baling system are $39,950. Milford does not keep track of operating costs for separate materials. Total costs to operate the recycling facility were $55,000, exclusive of purchase costs. Income was $22,534. Therefore, net costs were $32,466 to process approximately 200 tons of material. Milford delivers all of the material to Container Recovery Corporation (CRC) in Nashua, New Hampshire. Milford receives 3 cents per pound for natural HDPE and 7 cents per pound for PET. Milford pays 2 cents per pound to CRC to talce pigmented HDPE.


According to Mike Viani of Consumat-Sanco there were a number of operational problems with the baler when it was first installed. Problems included jamming of the perforator/flattener, and feed conveyor problems, where the feed conveyor would stop when it should have been feeding plastic to the bale chamber. Frontier Recycling Systems solved the feed conveyor problem by adjustments to the sensor in the bale chamber. Jamming of the perforator/flattener sti l l occurs.

III-11

Table III-1

Frontier Recycling Systems, Inc. Vertical Baler Model 4600

Specifications

III-12

According to Robert Courage, Consumat-Sanco had many problems with the entire facility because they were trying to process too many recyclables. However, since acquiring the facility from Consumat-Sanco and limiting the facility to just Milford residents there have been no significant problems, although it is necessary to reverse the perforatodflattener after each bale to clean out bottles caught on the perforator teeth. The problem is worse when PET bottles are being baled.

I

The teeth on the perforator are lined up in rows. The operator thinks there would be less clogging if the teeth were staggered. Frontier baler did make every other tooth smaller the last time they serviced the baler in an attempt to solve the problem. But it does not appear to have helped. Newer models now have an automated feature which senses perforator jams and automatically reverses the perforator one-quarter turn.

Maintenance on the conveyor, perforator and baler has been minimal. Currently there is a leak around the gasket on the hydraulic tank, but the Town could not recall any repairs other than normal wear and tear on the equipment.

Bale weights average 750 pounds for natural HDPE, 600 for pigmented HDPE and 450 pounds for PET.

Milford ran the baler without the perforator for four months. They had no problems running the baler at the rate they are using the baler. The bales averaged approximately 40-50 pounds less than with use of the perforator. However, according to Sergio Firpo of Frontier Recycling the perforator serves two purposes. In addition to increasing bale densities, the perforatodflattener increases the speed at which a bale of PET bottles, especially, can be produced by increasing the amount of bottles that can be fed into the bale chamber at one time. This is not necessarily a concern for Milford, which runs at low capacity, but could be of concern to users baling large quantities of PET each day.

111-13

E


CONIGLIARO INDUSTRIES INC.

Contact:

Equipment:

AUTOMATED REAR FEED VERTICAL BALER

F'RAMINGHAM, MASSACHUSETTS

Greg Conigliaro President Conigliaro Industries Inc. 701 Waverly Street Framingham, Massachusetts 508-872-9668

Ver-Tech, Model M-60 HP Automated Rear Feed Vertical Baler 13225 Industrial Park Blvd. Minneapolis, Minnesota 612-559-2590

Introduction

Conigliaro Industries began operations in 1989. They provide recycling services and products to a wide range of clients, including hospitals, colleges, restaurants, and office buildings. Services include waste audits, employee education and consumer public relations, recycling container sales and rentals, installation and rental of balers, collection and hauling of recyclable materials, material densification and brokerage, and manufacture of recycled packaging. The APC provided Conigliaro Industries with an automated rear feed baler in the spring of 1993 so that Conigliaro Industries could densify food service polystyrene (PS) collected from restaurant and institutional accounts.

Background 0

Conigliaro Industries is one of the larger recyclers of food service PS in eastem Massachusetts. Conigliaro Industries had been collecting food service PS from their restaurant and institutional accounts and delivering it to P&T Container Service Co., Inc., Lawrence, Massachusetts, for densification and shipping to the National Polystyrene Recycling Company (NPRC) processing facility in Bridgeport, New Jersey. NPRC stopped accepting P&T's food service PS and P&T in turn stopped accepting the material from Conigliaro Industries.

ILI-14

Conigliaro Industries did not want to stop accepting PS from its accounts so they started grinding and storing the PS and requested assistance from the APC with respect to handling and marketing the material. The NPRC tested a bale of the ground PS and determined that food waste and none PS plastic exceeded their specifications. NPRC recommended that Conigliaro bale non granulated PS because of the inability of NPRC to sort out contamination from the granulated PS. Therefore, the APC provided Conigliaro with a used, automated rear feed vertical baler which had previously been in operation at the Resource Recovery Systems MRF in Springfield, Massachusetts.

~

Conigliaro Industries collects and processes other plastics in addition to PS. No information is available on the quantities of polycarbonate bottles and polypropylene bottles collected by Conigliaro Industries. However, according to Conigliaro Industries they brokered the following plastics during 1992:

Material

LDPE film HDPE/PET bottles Expanded PS Food Service PS

Pounds

6,300 4,600

41,300 58,000

The APC baler is used primarily for PS alt,,ough it can be used for other pldstics should Conigliaro's other baler be inoperable.


Table III-2 presents specifications for the Ver-Tech M 60 HP baler. .

Operations

Conigliaro currently collects approximately 7,000 pounds of food service PS per week from its customers. Customers can collect the PS using any container they want. However, if the customer is having problems with excess contamination, Conigliaro recommends that the customer begin using a "Link-A-Bag" system distributed by Conigliaro Industries. These bags are essentially clear plastic bags attached to a rack, which are placed adjacent to the regular trash receptacle. Because they are clear, with easy to read signage above the bag, Greg Conigliaro claims that his customers are successful in reducing contamination to meet his specifications using this system. -

Conigliaro transports and stores the food service PS in the one-cubic-yard clear plastic bags which their customers use to store the PS. In preparation for baling, the material is emptied onto a plywood bin and raked into a homemade rotating trommel with a 2-inch screen mesh, The trommel is approximately eight feet long and three feet in diameter. Excess food and utensils

III-15

Table III-2

Ver-Tech Vertical Baler

Model GPI M-60HP

Specifications

II I It

II 48 x 30 x 60

11 Motor 10 HP II II I II

Baler Dimensions

III-16

fall through the trommel screen into garbage cans placed underneath. Paper tends to stay on the screen and is removed by the operator. One or two sorters then sort through the material falling off the end of the trommel onto a short incline conveyor. Contaminants are pulled out of the PS and the cleaned and sorted PS falls off the end of the conveyor into a gaylord.

Gaylords are stored until the baler is available to bale PS. The gaylords are then moved by hand or by forklift to the other end of the building where the baler is located. Two men lift the gaylord up and dump it into the front of the baler. When the baler is empty it will handle a full gaylord of PS at one time. However, as the bale chamber starts to fill up, less PS can be loaded at one time. By the time the chamber is one-half full of baled material, less than one-half a gaylord can be loaded at one time.

It takes approximately ten gaylords of loose food service PS or six gaylords of stacked foam trays to make one bale weighing approximately 325 pounds. The bale size is 30 inches by 48 inches by 60 inches. Therefore, the baled PS has a density of approximately 175 pounds per cubic yard. Approximately 40 bales will fit on a tractor trailer, making a 7,000 pound load for shipment.

It takes approximately two hours to make one bale of PS. Between two and four bales are produced per day. The bales are shrink wrapped to facilitate handling after baling. Cardboard is placed in the bottom of the baler and over the top of the baled material to facilitate feeding the wires through the channels. Otherwise the channels tend to fill up with PS making it difficult to feed the wire through when tieing off the bales.

Expansion of the PS during bale storage does not appear to be a problem. However, the operator stated that expanded foam trays tended to expand somewhat when the platen was raised, compared to the clear PS trays, thus taking more time to bale the expanded PS material. In addition, bales of 100 percent foam trays will break apart during handling. Therefore, to facilitate baling Conigliaro mixes foam trays with non-foam PS during baling.

Economics

Conigliaro currently receives 7 cents per pound for the PS delivered to NPRC. However, NPRC deducts 23 percent from the delivered pounds to account for moisture and contamination before paying the 7 cents. This is despite the fact that Conigliaro Industries has one of the highest rated materials accepted by NPRC. According to Greg Conigliaro, President of Conigliaro Industries, it costs approximately 5 cents per pound to ship the PS to the NPRC plant in New Jersey, and 30 cents per pound to sort, clean and bale the PS. Baling costs are not kept separate from the other processing costs.

Because the cost to process the PS far exceeds its market value, Conigliaro charges its accounts a service fee for processing the material, over and above its collection charge.

111- 17


The current sorting system works well with respect to producing a clean food service PS that meets NPRC’s specifications, although the smell of syrup and waste food is fairly strong.

However, the need to store the cleaned PS in gaylords, move the gaylords to the other end of the building for baling, and load the baler manually is inefficient. Therefore, Conigliaro is planning on purchasing a feed conveyor and moving the baler adjacent to the sorting operation. The incline conveyor at the end of the sorting line could then feed the vertical baler directly, taking full advantage of the automated loading feature of the baler.

III- 18


NORTH COUNTRY COUNCIL

CLOSED END SINGLE RAM HORIZONTAL BALER

LITTLETON, NEW HAMPSHIRE

Contact: Marghie Seymour Solid Waste Planner North Country Council 65 Main Street Littleton, New Hampshire 603-444-6303

Tony Ilacqua Littleton Transfer and Recycling Manager Town Office Littleton, New Hampshire 603-444-1447

Brian Hogan Resource Technology Corporation 200 Milton Street P.O. Box 506 Dedham, Massachusetts 02027 617-329-3900

Equipment: KMF Model 4540HS Horizontal Closed End Baler K-Metal Fabrication Inc. 300 Linton Avenue Croydon, Pennsylvania 2 15-788-5540

Introduction

The Littleton baler was purchased to bale plastics and other recyclables collected at drop-

Information on the plastic recycling program and the expanded metal trailers used for plastic collection is available in Section I1 of this report.

off facilities in the northern New Hampshire towns served by the North County Council. ~

In-19

Background

The North Country Council purchased the Model 4540HS KMF Baler, together with a feed conveyor and hopper, from Resource Technology Corporation, Dedham, Massachusetts in 1992. The baler was manufactured in 1981 and was previously used for baling paper.

The baler was installed in Littleton’s new recycling facility in the spring of 1993. The feed conveyor has not been installed, because it would have to run in front of storage bays for recyclables. A longer conveyor that could be elevated above the storage bays would be required if a conveyor is to be used.


Table 111-3 presents manufacturer’s specifications for the Model 4540HS KMF baler.

Operations

The baler is currently being loaded using a front-end loader. The loader must be driven around the building to the storage bay each time to pick up a bucket load of plastic bottles. The loader can scoop up HDPE bottles but must be loaded with a barrel for PET bottles because of the storage bin configuration. The loader then returns to the baler and discharges the bottles into a 72 to 60 inch feed hopper above the baling chamber. The baler automatically cycles whenever the feed chamber is full.

It takes approximately 1.5 to 2 hours to produce one bale of plastic bottles using the loader to feed the baler. This is significantly less than the six to eight hours Littleton claimed it was taking to produce a bale using their old manual feed vertical baler. However, if equipped with an automatic feed conveyor the new baler should be capable of producing four to six bales per hour.

Economics

The cost of the used baler, hopper and feed conveyor was $23,000. According to Tony Ilaqua, Recycling Manager, it costs Littleton approximately 65 and 81 dollars per ton, exclusive of capital costs, to load and bale HDPE and PET, respectively. Costs include maintenance, labor, loader time, electricity and bale wire. PET costs are higher because of the need to manually fill the loader bucket.


At least one of the early bales of natural HDPE broke in storage. Therefore, Littleton is currently using two wires for each of the five ties. Littleton is also strapping the bales perpendicular to the bales. It is unlikely that this strapping is effective given that it is perpendicular to the potential expansion of the bales.

m-20

Loading the baler with the front-end loader from storage bales on the other side of the building is inefficient. However, given the relatively small quantity of plastic handled by the facility, it appears to be sufficient at this time.

The packing on the ram cylinder leaked and the cylinder had to be reground to eliminate scoring. This cost 1,OOO dollars.

III-2 1

Table III-3

KMF Horizontal Baler Model 4540 HS

Specifications

Platen Force

Motor

Bale Size (H.W.L) I 46 x 40 x 60-72 inches

110,000 - 180,000 pounds

40 HP

Cycle Time I 20 Seconds

Baler Ties 1 s Baler Dimensions

Height

III-22


MONMOUTH PROCESSING COMPANY

OCEAN TOWNSHIP, NEW JERSEY

HORIZONTAL, CLOSED END, TWO RAM BALER

Contact: Jeff Serkin, President Robert L. Blenden, Vice President Monmouth Processing Company 3418 Sunset Avenue Ocean Township, New Jersey 07712 (908) 922-9420

Equipment: Selco 2-Ram Baler, Model 2R-12100 Harris Group 2520 Broadway NE Minneapolis, Minnesota 55413 (612) 627-0260

Introduction

Monmouth Processing Company has been in business since the 1940's, collecting and processing recyclable materials. Their operation includes two facilities in Monmouth County, New Jersey. They operate a materials recovery facility which receives and sorts commingled recyclables, and an intermediate processing facility which processes and bales fiber and plastic material. The Selco 2-Ram Baler was purchased in 1992 and is installed in the IPC, located in Ocean Township, New Jersey. This facility is approximately 20 years old.

The IPC receives separated materials, either loose or in "non-spec" bales. The material is inspected, bales are broken open and the materials are rebaled after removal of contamination or non-spec material. In addition to the new Selco 2-Ram plastics baler, the facility includes 2 HRF3 paper balers. Total plant capacity is 1,500 tons per week which includes an average of 100 tons per week of plastic, consisting primarily of PET.


Table III-4 presents manufacturer's specifications for the Selco 2-Ram baler.

In-23

Table III-4

Platen Force

Motor

Selco 2-Ram Horizontal Baler

Model 2R-12100 (1)

282,000 pounds

100 HP

Specifications

Cycle Time

Bale Ties

Mer Dimensions Height Width Depth

~

JBale Size (H,w,L) 45 x 30 x 62 inches

NA 5

94 inches 162 inches 348 inches

(1) This baler is now produced by Harris Waste Management as Model HRB 516N

III-24

Operations

On the day of the inspection, the facility was processing bales of PET received from another facility which were under weight and contained small amounts of metal and PVC contamination. Based on visual observations, these bales contained 2 to 5 percent capped bottles that had not been crushed in the previous baler, which was the primary cause of the low weight bales.

The bales were broken open and spread out on a tipping floor and inspected by 5 sorters who removed metal caps and PVC bottles. The material was then fed onto a 60" wide Mayfram conveyor system that feeds the Selco baler. The baler produces standard size mill bales (45x30~62 inches) which average 2,000 to 2,200 pounds per bale. The two ram design is very efficient in crushing capped PET bottles and none were observed in the re-baled material.

Economics

The capital cost of the Selco baler, hopper, and feed conveyor was $168,000 when purchased in 1992. Monmouth Processing Company did not provide information on operating costs of the baler.


No problems with the baler were reported. In fact, the owners stated that they were very pleased with operation of the baler, and were eager to show visitors the high quality of the bales produced.

III-25

SECTION IV

GRANULATORS

An alternative method for densifying plastic containers is to grind the plastic to produce plastic flakes. The value of plastic flake is typically higher than plastic bales. This is because the plastic flake can either be used as a feedstock directly or can be further refined for the end user, while plastic bales must be broken and the plastic ground first. Thus plastic flake is typically sold to an end user, while plastic bales are sold to a plastic reclaimer.

The problem with grinding the plastic to produce flake is that once it is in flake form it is difficult, if not impossible, to detect and remove contaminants that may have been in the plastic. For example, flakes of clear PVC bottles mixed in with flakes of clear PET bottles render the PET unmarketable at relatively low concentrations of PVC. As a consequence, users of flake will be very cautious about purchasing flake from a new source, or from a source that does not have a demonstrated track record.

Grinding plastic may also be more costly than baling plastic. This is more likely to be the case for PET plastic containers, which are more difficult to grind than HDPE plastic, and for dirty plastic. The dirt is very abrasive and dulls the knives used for grinding, increasing knife sharpening and replacement costs.

As illustrated by Figure 12, a plastic bottle granulator typically consists of a feed conveyor, hopper, granulator (or grinder), a blower assembly to evacuate ground plastic from the grinding chamber, and a cyclone to remove the air and discharge the plastic to a container, typically a gaylord. The granulator can be hand fed, eliminating the need for a feed conveyor. However, this significantly reduces the throughput of the granulator. The granulator can also be used without the blower and cyclone. This is typical in manufacturing settings where the granulator can be mounted on a container which captures the ground plastic. However, for most plastic bottle .recycling operations, this is not a feasible method of operating because the container must be emptied too often and the granulator must be turned off during emptying.

According to Robert M. Chagnon, in an article entitled "Granulation for Post-Consumer Plastics Recycling", Resource Recycling, August 1990, the following five factors must be considered in selecting a granulator for plastic bottles:

hopper feed arrangement

rotor design and knife configuration

available screen area and hole size

horsepower

method of evacuation

IV- 1

4 Grmtulator.

Incline Conveyor & I

I I

k 5'- 0" 15'- 0"

Granulator w/ Conveyor, Cyclone & Filter Bag

The design throughput of granulators varies over a wide range (e.g., 200 to 2,000 pounds of plastic bottles per hour). A typical granulator processing 1,OOO pounds of plastic per hour can grind 6,000 bottles per hour or 1.6 bottles per second. Thus, hand feeding of a typical granulator is impossible if the granulator is to be fed at a level sufficient to its capacity.

__- -

Mechanical feeding arrangements include belt conveyors, screw conveyors and air stream transport. Screw conveyors are not effective for plastic bottles and air stream transport was not used at any of the facilities observed for this report.

Granulators for plastic bottles are typically tangential grinders, as opposed to horizontal grinders. This means that the fly knives (the knives that rotate as opposed to the fixed bed knives) are mounted tangential to each other, at approximately 11 o’clock and 5 o’clock. Horizontal grinders typically have the knives mounted at 9 o’clock and 3 o’clock. Tangential grinders are used for bottles because the bottles tend to be drawn into the grinder faster, with less bouncing on top of the knives. This is less of a problem if the bottles are flattened first.

The number of knife sets also varies among grinders. Typically, a grinder used for plastic bottles will have two or three sets of knives, as opposed to five sets of knives for grinding plastic film. Again, this ensures that the bottles will be drawn into the grinder faster, even though the grinding process is slower with fewer knives.

The type of knife is also important. According to Robert Chagnon, a knife with a steep 40 degree cutting angle is the proper choice for PET and HDPE bottles. A D2 steel is also recommended over standard chrome vanadium (W) steel composition.

The size of the plastic flakes is controlled by the size of the openings in the screen that surrounds the lower half of the knives. The plastic continues to be ground by the knives until the pieces are smaller than the screen holes, at which time they are pushed or fall by gravity through the screen. The rate at which the flake is removed from the grinding chamber is related to the open screen area (325 square inches with 3/8 inch holes for a 1 , W pound per hour machine), and whether a blower is used. According to Mike Olson of the Blades Machinery Company, the blower used for evacuating the plastic flake from the grinder increases the speed of the grinder by as much as 40 to 60 percent by sucking the plastic flake through the screen openings.

Typically, the screen sizes used for plastic bottle grinding range from 3/4 of an inch down to 114 of an inch. According to Olson, reducing the screen siz6 from 318 to 1/4 of an inch reduces throughput of the grinder by approximately 25 percent.

~- Plastic contaminated with sticky substances, such as soft drink syrup or detergent residue, will reduce the productivity of a grinder because over time the screen will tend to plug. Eventually, the grinder must be shut down and the screen cleaned. This may have to be done much more frequently with sticky materials then would be necessary if the grinder were just shut down to replace dull knives.

Iv-3

The sticky material can also lead to jams in the piping leading from the blower to the cyclone.

As discussed above, dirt and other contaminants significantly increase granulating costs. The largest single maintenance cost on the granulator is sharpening and replacing knives. Dirty plastic will continuously abrade the knives leading to premature dulling and eventual replacement. A single piece of metal in with the plastic can destroy a knife set which might cost up to $1,500 to replace. To guard against metal, many granulators are set up with a magnet in the feed hopper to capture metal and shut the machine down.

Typically, a granulator operator will keep two sets of knives. When one set gets dull the machine is shut down, the dull knives removed, and the sharp knives inserted. Then the dull knives can be sharpened while the granulator is in operation with the sharp knives. Knife sharpening currently costs between 50 and 70 cents per linear inch of knife.

The plastic resin that is being ground can impact both the amount of time between knife sharpening and the productivity of the machine. PET plastic is much more difficult to grind than polyethylene, reducing the amount of PET that can be ground per hour as well as the amount of time between knife sharpenings. It should be noted, however, that HDPE can melt, or plasticize, in the cutting chamber if an open rotor design is not used. Polystyrene, on the other hand, tends to shatter when ground, which means that it can be ground quickly, but that a significant amount of the material will be a fine dust as opposed to flake.

A cyclone is used to remove the air from the granulate, prior to discharging it into a gaylord. Without the cyclone, the velocity of the flake would be so great that it could not be contained in a gaylord. If the material being ground is dirty, resulting in a lot of dust, or the material is likely to produce fine dust, then the cyclone should include a filter bag assembly to reduce dust discharge to the working area or the environment.

Granulators should be specified with noise reducing cabinets, and operators should wear ear protection devices. Even with noise reducing cabinets noise levels of 80db are common according to one operator.

According to Chagnon, other important features to look for in a granulator include:

0 Rotor bearings mounted outside the cutting chamber to prevent grease from contaminating the regrind and to keep dust and fires from fouling the bearings.

0 Built in safety features.

Ease of access to the cutting chamber.

IV-4


BEND (OREGON) RECYCLING TEAM

GRANULATOR, CYCLONE

Contacts: Suzanne Johannsen, Recycling Programs Manager Bend Recycling Team P.O. Box 849 Bend, Oregon 97709 503-383-3814

Sergio Firpo Frontier Recycling Systems, Inc. 4600 West Chicago Avenue Chicago Illinois 6065 1 3 12-626-0050

Equipment: Blades Manufacturing Co., Inc. Bill Neil 750 Nicholas Boulevard Elk Grove Village, Illinois 60007 708-439-2 126

Model HD-6 Foremost Granulator Scott Swift P.O. Box 644 Fairfield, New Jersey 20 1-227-0700

Introduction

Bend Recycling Team (BRT) is a non-profit organization that accepts all recyclable materials from curbside, commercial and drop-off programs in Deschutes County, Oregon.

In September 1991, The American Plastics Council purchased and installed the following equipment at BRT’s site in Bend:

Model HI>-6 Foremost Granulator Kongskilde Cyclone Blower Take-Away System

IV-5

Under contract with the APC, Sergio Firpo of Frontier Recycling Systems Inc., Chicago, Illinois, purchased used equipment and had it reconditioned for use at BRT. New bearings, pulleys, knives, screens and electrical motor were installed on the granulator. A five (5) hp negative pressure blower and cyclone were also installed to evacuate material through the 4-inch pipe that exits the granulator.

Background

Bend, Oregon (population 22,OOO), the largest municipality in Deschutes County, requires its two residential haulers to provide weekly curbside collection of seven materials, including milk jugs. In addition, Deschutes County has ten remote sites, including transfer stations and portable drop-box centers, serving an area of more than 1,OOO square miles with 70,000 residents and a large tourist population. Curbside collection in Bend provides 43 percent of all materials accepted by the Bend Recycling Team. BRT's collection and processing site, located at the Knott Regional Landfill in Bend, handles approximately 10,OOO tons per year of all materials, including: 5,400 tons of various paper fibers; 4,000 tons of wood and yard debris; 600 tons of glass; 430 tons of various scrap metals including appliances; 70 tons of tires; and 60 tons of milk jugs and other natural HDPE bottles. Natural HDPE, other than milkjugs, amounts to about 5 percent of the total natural HDPE handled.


Granulator equipment consists of an incline belt conveyor, granulator hopper, a tangential feed, model HD6 Foremost granulator, equipped with a 15 hp motor, a 5 hp blower evacuation system and a Kongskilde cyclone. Two rotary mounted knives are used in the cutting chamber, with flake evacuated through '15 inch diameter screen openings. The systems average throughput is 300 pounds per hour, accounting for actual work rates.

Operations

Milk jugs and other natural HDPE bottles collected curbside in Deschutes County are unloaded' at BRT into 2-cubic-yard heavy-woven polypropylepe bags. Milk jugs from depots typically arrive in these bags. Workers empty the bags onto a plywood table that serves as hopper for the conveyor. One or two employees stand along the conveyor and pick out items other than natural bottle HDPE for disposal. Natural HDPE bottles continue down the conveyor and ascend an inclined section that carries them into the granulator hopper.

The granulating equipment is operated about 35 hours each month, or not quite two hours per day on average, although it runs all day some days and not at all on others.

Sorting and granulating equipment and gaylord storage occupy 1,600 square feet of a 6,000 square foot warehouse building. The covered dock, which can ship or receive on two sides, adds another 3,600 feet of working space to the facility.

IV-6

A local trucking firm leaves a 28-foot trailer on premises and hauls it about 150 miles to markets in Eugene or the Portland area. The trailer may sit on BRT’s premises for as long as two months at a time.

Economics

Capital cost of the granulator system, exclusive of the incline conveyor which BRT already had, was $17,000.

Program managers estimate that it costs them $75.20 a ton, or $0.04 a pound, to prepare plastics for market. This breaks out as follows:

Average Wagg -

$

Handling (90 minutes per ton)

Granulating (390 minutes per ton)

Overhead

6 6

Per Ton $

9.00 39.00 37.20

At the time of the site visit BRT was receiving $0.08 per pound for the granulated natural HDPE.

A set of four blades costs $600 plus shipping. The knives are sharpened every three months at a cost of $100 and are replaced every six months.


The system’s average throughput is 300 pounds per hour. Full gaylords weigh 625 pounds with the M inch flakes, and 675 pounds with 3/8 inch flake.

BRT’s manager and operators were generally satisfied with equipment performance. They described several minor mechanical problems that have been remedied:

Matend, especially when wet, cakes up in the cyclone and has to be cleared out regularly with a steel brush.

0 A special plate-puller was needed to remove and replace rubber paddles on the bottom of the cyclone. The paddles (six for $35) have to be replaced yearly.

0 Granulator noise requires ear-protection headgear at $25 a pair. The unmuffled granulator generates a painful level of noise to the unprotected ear.

IV-7

BRT estimates the granulator maintenance averages two hours per week. The conveyor must be greased every week. The granulator motor must be lubricated at least monthly. Knives are sharpened and replaced every three months. The dust bag has to be cleaned.

Demand and price for granulated material have declined since the equipment was acquired, and the manager believes BRT would have more flexibility with a baler. The original idea was to add value, but price is now identical for granulated and baled natural HDPE bottles. Most markets want baled material so they can control quality. Export is not an option, because of value-added taxes for grinding.


GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF LANE COUNTY

GRANULATOR, HOPPER, CONVEYOR, CYCLONE

Contacts: Nancy Glines, Recycling Programs Manager Goodwill Industries of Lane County 855 Seneca Street Eugene, Oregon 97402 503-345- 1801

Sergio Firpo Frontier Recycling Systems, Inc. 4600 West Chicago Avenue Chicago, Illinois 6065 1 3 12-626-0050

Equipment: Model MS- 18 Foremost Granulator Scott Swift P . 0 Box 644 Faiffield, New Jersey 201-227-0700

Blades Manufacturing Co., Inc. Bill Neil 750 Nicholas Boulevard Elk Grove Village, Illinois 60007 708-439-2 126

Zenith Cutter 5200 Zenith Parkway PO Box 2252 Rockford, Illinois 6 1 13 1-0252 800-223-5202 815-282-5232 (FAX)

IV-9

Kice Takeaway System P.O. Box 11388 2040 S. Mead Wichita, Kansas 67202 3 16-267-428 1

Roach Manufacturing Co. Highway 63 North Trumann, Arkansas

Thomas Conveyor & Equipment Co. Hillside, Illinois 708-449-2 100

Introduction

In 1989, Lane County required all curbside collectors of residential recyclables to accept all rigid plastic containers coded 1, 2, 5 and 6 (PET, HDPE, polypropylene, and food service polystyrene but no expanded polystyrene). The local Goodwill Industries in Eugene, Oregon contracted with the County to accept these items from three curbside programs serving 80,000 households.

The handling and densification system Goodwill owned was not adequate to handle the increased volume generated by the Lane County program. Therefore, in September 1991, The APC contracted with Sergio Firpo of Frontier Recycling Systems Inc. to design a plastic sorting and grinding system to meet Goodwill’s needs. Based on the design, the APC provided funding for purchase and installation of the following equipment at Goodwill’s site in Eugene:

0 Model MS-18 Foremost Granulator 0 Elevated tilting table to unload caged plastics into the hopper 0 Hopper 0 Roach Conveyor (50 feet)

Kice Cyclone Blower Take-Away System

Background

Goodwill Industries of Lane County is a non-profit organization that employs mentally and physically handicapped individuals.

Goodwill Industries currently receives approximately 50,000 pounds per month of plastics from Lane County, They have been able to sort and sell granulated natural and

N-10

pigmented HDPE bottles, which represents about 87 percent of the plastics received. An estimated 75,000 pounds per year of blow-molded and injection-molded PET, PP and non-bottle HDPE, as well as other miscellaneous plastics are disposed of. Oregon is a bottle-bill state, so most PET is custom. In 1992, Goodwill sold 525,290 total pounds of HDPE bottle-grade, of which 57,000 pounds were pigmented and 468,000 pounds (89 percent) were natural.


The Model MS-18 Foremost Granulator is used to grind natural HDPE bottles. The granulator is fed by a 10-foot incline belt conveyor. A three phase 15 hp electric motor powers the granulator, which has an average throughput of 300 pounds per hour.

Two tangentially mounted fly knives grind the material against two fixed bed knives until the material can pass through a 3/8 inch screen. A 5 hp blower evacuation system and cyclone is used to collect the material in gaylords.

Final density of the flake is about 750 pounds per cubic yard.

Operations

Plastic containers collected curbside in Lane County are brought to the Goodwill site and unloaded from above into 10-cubic-yard cages placed in the recessed concrete dock. Forklift trucks carry these cages to the elevated tilting table where they are inclined by a hydraulic mechanism, sliding the plastics into the hopper.

Two employees stationed on either side of the conveyor line at the outlet of the hopper pick out colored HDPE bottles and throw them into a Ball & Jewel1 granulator. They also pull out non-bottle plastics and non-HDPE bottles for disposal, tossing them onto a side conveyor that carries them away to 4-cubic-yard dumpster, which is emptied when full into 30-cubic-yard drop-boxes out at the dock.

Natural HDPE bottles (mostly milkjugs) continue down a 19-inch wide, 30-foot Roach conveyor, until they reach the 10-foot long inclined belt conveyor that carries them into the granulator hopper.

The facility operates 12 hours each day, with two workers sorting during the daytime shift and one worker handling the four-hour night shift.

The system’s average throughput is about 300 pounds per hour, taking into account actual work rates and typical delays. Operators report they fill one gaylord every 2.5 to three hours. Frequent non-mechanical stoppages were observed, so potential throughput might be higher.

IV-11

Sorting and granulating equipment and gaylord storage occupy 3,000 square feet of a 24,000 square foot warehouse building.

Economics

Cost of the installation was $3 1,500, including design, engineering, material purchase, fabrication, materials, freight and project management. The grinder alone, bought reconditioned, cost $13,000, complete with blower and cyclone. The storage hopper, tilt table and conveyor cost $6,550.

~

Program managers estimate that it costs them $0.04 to prepare plastics for market, not including supervisor wages and indirect costs.


Goodwill’s managers and operators express satisfaction with the durability and performance of the equipment over a two-year period. Several problems occurred early and were remedied, including:

0 Material kept bunching in the cyclone. Evidently, the valve at the tip of the cyclone was intended for pellets, which are heavier than flakes. A $30 valve replaced the existing one and solved the problem.

0 Bolts came loose in the base of the granulator after one year of operation, and the knives, out of balance, began to shimmy, shearing off the bolts. New bolts were welded down and the problem was resolved.

0 Granulator noise was troublesome at first, in part because the repetitive sound triggered epileptic seizures and erratic behavior in Goodwill’s clientele. Egg-crate foam, wrapped entirely around the granulator, reduced the problem significantly. Even with sound insulation equipment operators wear heavy earphone protection.

0 Parts were considered somewhat difficult to get, and service from the manufacturer was regarded as poor, perhaps because the equipment was purchased second-hand through a dealer other than the manufacturer.

Goodwill chose granulation because they believed it would fetch a higher price, due to the value added by processing. In 1989, granulated natural HDPE could be sold for $0.35 per pound, compared with $0.08-$0.10 for baled. The price dropped to $0.18 about the time Goodwill began granulating, and averaged $0.10 during 1992. The current price is $0.09 per pound, FOB Goodwill’s dock, which is about the same as for baled HDPE. Taxes on value-added material make it non-economic to export granulated post-consumer HDPE.

_______

IV-12

Market instability, low prices and limited outlets concern Goodwill’s managers, but they have succeeded in selling almost all their material, except for the 13 percent of rigid containers that must now be disposed.

IV- 13


EDA PLASTICS

Contact:

GRANUTEC GRANULATOR

KEENE, NEW HAMPSHIRE

Armando Diaz Plant Manager 131 Water Street Keene, New Hampshire 603-357-9475

Equipment: Granutec Granulator, Model 1632TFG Granutec Inc. P.O. Box 637 East Douglas, Massachusetts 508-478-3 80 1

Introduction

EDA Plastics was a HDPE plastic reclaimer, processing natural and pigmented HDPE bottles. They began operations in April, 1992 in a 25,000 square foot building in Keene, New Hampshire. The plant was closed in July, 1993 because costs for processing the plastics were higher than the price EDA could receive for either the granulated or pelletized material produced at the plant.

The APC provided EDA with a Granutec upright granulator, with a blower and cyclone. This granulator was mounted adjacent to a Cumberland granulator which had been used to granulate all of the incoming plastic. The intent was to granulate natural HDPE with one granulator and pigmented HDPE with the other granulator.

The Granutec granulator had been set up and operated on a test basis only prior to EDA closing the plant. Therefore, reported throughput is based on test runs only, combined with judgements made by the Plant Manager based on the performance of the Cumberland granulator.

IV-14

Background

EDA was purchasing between 400,000 and 500,000 pounds per month of baled plastic, primarily from municipal recycling programs. On average, about 60 percent of the plastic bottles purchased were natural HDPE and 40 percent pigmented. EDA was paying 7.5 --

or mixed bales. The million pounds of flake

cents per pound for natural and 2.5 cents per pound for pigmented plant had the capacity to produce 9 million pounds of pellets and 6 Per Year .


The Granutec upright granulator requires 3 phase 440 power to run the 50 hp motor. The EDA equipment includes an incline feed conveyor approximately 12 feet long, a 3 knife tangential feed grinder, a blower and a cyclone with filter bag assembly. The entire assembly requires floor space of approximately 30 feet by 10 feet. The granulator stands approximately 12 feet high, and the cyclone stands approximately 15 feet high.

According to the EDA Plant Manager, they expected the Granutec granulator to process approximately 1,OOO pounds per hour producing a three quarter inch flake.

Operations

Bales received by EDA were manually broken and sorted to produce either natural or pigmented HDPE. Caps and other contaminants were removed by the sorters. The sorted material was granulated, then washed and dried in a proprietary washing system developed by EDA.

EDA was running two eight-hour shifts and expected to pull the knives to sharpen them once every ten days. This is equivalent to 160 hours, or 160,OOO pounds of plastic processed per sharpening. It takes approximately three hours to pull the knives and replace them with a second set.

Armando Diaz estimated that each set of knives would last approximately six months before they had to be replaced at a cost of approximately $1500. Thus one set of hives could process approximately 1.9 million pounds of HDPE plastic. It should be noted here that the lifetime of the knives is highly dependent on the cleanliness of the plastic. Dirt can significantly reduce the lifetime of the knives. Metal objects can destroy a set of knives immediately. Both of EDA’s granulators were equipped with magnets to pull off any plastic containing metals and shut the granulator down. Despite manual sorting and the use of a magnet, two sets of knives on the Cumberland granulator had been destroyed by metal objects since EDA opened in 1992.

Iv-15

Economics

No information on operating costs for this system are available because EDA had only test run the granulator prior to closing the plant. Capital costs for the equipment were $30,745, which included: $24,300 for the granulator; $2,490 for the blower; $1,230 for the cyclone; $1,800 for the soundproofed cabinet; and, $920 for the filter bag and miscellaneous equipment. EDA installed the equipment.


Information on performance of the granulator is not available because EDA closed down after only running the granulator on a test basis.

IV- 16

Contacts:

Equipment:

Introduction


ECOLOGY ACTION OF TEXAS

FOREMOST HD-6 GRANULATOR

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Scott Beaver, Executive Director Ecology Action of Texas, Inc. 210 Industrial Blvd. #B Austin, Texas 78745 5 12-326-9396

Foremost HD-6 Granulator Blades Machinery Company, Inc. 750 Nicholas Blvd. Elk Grove Village, Illinois 708-439-09 17

The APC supplied Ecology Action of Texas with a reconditioned Foremost Model HD-6 granulator for grinding plastic bottles. For background information on Ecology Action see Section I1 of this report.


The Foremost H-6 Granulator was supplied to Ecology Action equipped with a 15 hp motor. Larger motors, up to 30 hp can be specified for this granulator.

The granulator is a tangential feed granulator with two rotating knives. Screen diameter is 5/16 inch. The granulator is equipped with a 5 hp blower evacuator and a cyclone. There is no feed conveyor. Bottles are fed by hand'into the 14 x 18 inch hopper opening.

Operation

Plastic milk jugs are fed by hand into the granulator. It takes approximately two hours to produce one gaylord weighing 750 pounds.

IV-17

Ecology Action currently sharpens the blades once every six months. Ecology Action processed approximately 73,000 pounds of HDPE during 1992. Thus it was necessary to sharpen the blades after processing approximately 35,000 to 40,000 pounds of HDPE bottles.

Economics ____

Capital cost for the used granulator, blower, and cyclone was $10,000. Installation ~

and start-up assistance was an additional $2,500. Ecology Action does not keep information on operating costs of the granulator.


Ecology Action has been very happy with the granulator. The only problem observed was the noise of the granulator, which appears to be common. Ear protection was necessary. Clearly, hand feeding of the granulator significantly limits its throughput, compared to similar granulators with feed conveyors.

IV- 1 8

SECTION V

MISCELLANEOUS EQUIPMENT

The APC provided funding in West Patterson, New Jersey, for improvements to a sorting and processing line for mixed recyclables, including plastic bottles. The equipment installed by West Patterson Recycling included two conveyors and a grizzly screen designed to separate plastic bottles from aluminum cans. The performance of this equipment is described below.

v- 1

Contacts:

Equipment:


WEST PATERSON RECYCLING (WPAR)

MATERIAL CONVEYORS AND GRIZZLY SCREEN

WEST PATERSON, NEW JERSEY

Don Scine - Plant Manager Mark Rudman - Plastics Manager West Paterson Recycling (WPAR) P.O. Box 2140 West Paterson, New Jersey Telephone (201) 256-7519

Inclined and Horizontal Conveyor (Conesco) and Grizzly Screen (FMC)

Introduction

West Paterson Recycling (WPAR) began operations during the mid 1980’s at the present location. Don Scine reported that they were the first commercial facility in New Jersey to begin accepting plastic containers in 1988. The operation has grown beyond its original expectations to the point where the existing site is totally utilized and throughput capacity is being restricted by lack of space. In 1990 the facility received funding from the APC to purchase additional equipment to assist in the processing of plastic containers.

Background

Prior to the addition of the new equipment in 1990, the facility was a relatively standard sorting facility with receiving hopper, inclined conveyor to an elevated sorting table, with a magnetic separator at the upper head pulley on the conveyor. Three colors of glass and aluminum were hand sorted. The feed conveyor was very steep and not very effective handling larger, lighter plastic containers such as milk jugs. This problem, coupled with increased throughput of the facility in general, prompted W A R to develop a second sorting line.


New equipment funded by the APC included a loading hopper located in the receiving yard and 24 inch inclined and horizontal conveyors which transfer the commingled containers into the processing building. Inside the building the horizontal conveyor discharges onto a

v-2

grizzly screen, after passing a magnetic separator at the end pulley. The openings in the grizzly screen are designed to pass a standard 12 ounce aluminum beverage can (2.5") but retain a 1 liter PET bottle (3.0"). The removal of the aluminum beverage cans prior to the air classifier is the primary purpose of the grizzly screen.

Undersized material falling through the grizzly drops into a steel chute which directs the material down to the original receiving hopper, approximately 10 feet below, where it is then conveyed up to the manual sorting level. The oversized material, consisting primarily of plastic containers and larger glass containers, moves off the inclined grizzly into an air classifier where the lighter plastic material is blown into an exit chute and falls into a mixed plastics hopper at floor level. The heavies fall into another chute and down into the original receiving hopper.

~

An inclined conveyor transfers the mixed plastic material from the hopper into a horizontal baler. A single sorter removes PET, colored HDPE, and other contaminants from the baler feed conveyor so that only natural HDPE goes to the horizontal plastics baler. PET is conveyed outside the building and placed in a packer truck which is then baled at the end of the second shift. Colored HDPE is stored in a hopper until baled. The facility sometimes bales mixed HDPE dependent on market conditions.

The new equipment was installed independent of the original sorting line and both lines are used. Therefore, plastic containers that en& the original line are hand sorted on the original sorting platform.

The process is shown graphically on the following schematic drawing (Figure 13). This drawing is intended to show the major material flows associated with the plastic flow path and does not show several other material flows such as ferrous metal from the magnetic separators, aluminum cans or glass. It is important to note that the new conveyors are located along the same center line as the original sorting line which places the grizzly screen and air classifier directly over the original feed hopper. The schematic drawing shows these to be offset in order to emphasize the material flows.

Economics

No information on operating costs for the new equipment was provided by WRAP. The facility charges a $35 per ton tipping fee.

Since installing the equipment, both the inclined and horizontal conveyors were severely damaged by truck traffic and have been nearly totally rebuilt. The conveyor belts require shutdown and maintenance approximately two to three times per year and the belts are replaced once per year.

The FMC grizzly screen experienced frequent frame damage and bar failures and has also received extensive repairs. The frame has been totally rebuilt.

v-3

PET COMPACTOR

a

L

ORIGINAL SORTING PLATFORM

I I

-.

x ORIGINAL HOPPER *

CONVEYOR

I SCREEN

I PLASTICS MIXED PLASTICS BALER C [ - - * HOPPER

+ I INCLINED SORT.

CONVEYOR

AIR CLASSIFIER.

w PET HOPPER

OUTSIDE HOPPER

INCLINED CONVEYOR

FIGURE 13

Although the combined grizzly screen and air classifier appear to be functioning well in separating the plastic container stream, the undersized material from the screen and heavy fraction from the air classifier drops nearly ten feet into the original feed hopper. This creates a high degree of glass breakage, estimated at 30 percent by Mark Rudman. This vertical drop is necessitated by severe space constraints that prevent a higher conveyor from moving this material directly to the manual sorting platform.

The grizzly screen is subject to frequent jamming from partially crushed plastic containers which must be manually removed by a full time sorter stationed at the grizzly. The close tolerances of the bar spacing required to pass an aluminum can but retain a 1-liter PET bottle is the primary reason for this problem. The screen passes smaller 16-ounce PET beverage containers which are then hand sorted on the original sorting platform.

Other problems, not specific to the APC equipment include severe space limitations both within the building and the storage yard. Bale storage, glass storage and material delivery are all severely limited for a facility of this capacity. The plastic baler is an older, manual tie model of limited capacity. A second baler for PET would increase efficiency and avoid the current double handling.

Since the facility uses both the original sorting line and the new equipment, plastic is sorted at two locations which is inefficient. Under this scenario, the grizzly screen does not appear to be doing much for the operation. By removing the grizzly screen, the aluminum cans in the material originating in the outside hopper would wind up in the light fraction of the air classifier along with the plastic and would require hand sorting on the inclined conveyor to the plastics baler. Since the screen requires a sorter to clean the screen, there would be no change in manpower required.

Although the two redundant sorting lines add some flexibility to the operation in the case of equipment failure or maintenance, the glass breakage and inefficiencies appear to override the added flexibility factor. If the original feed hopper and conveyor had been removed, all of the material could be brought in on the new conveyors and air classified into two streams, with more efficient sorting using less labor.

v-5

Documents

Technical Assistance Program Equipment Evaluation · The plastic recycling program began in. October, 1991. The District was interested in integrating plastic recycling into the drop-off