Gypsum Recycling Committee

During our most recent meeting on the 11th of September, Chair Terry Weaver welcomed new members and shared the latest updates with the committee, including the status of our funding drive for the ongoing Lifecycle Analysis project. Thanks to all members who have already contributed!

The data is expected to reinforce our position that the collection and recycling of gypsum represents a far better outcome than depositing this product in a landfill. Related to this, Malak Anshassi and Nicole Robey shared the latest findings from Innovative Technical Solutions (ITS), the vendor contracted to complete the LCA project work. Though findings are still preliminary, ITS expects to be able to complete the first phase of the work in the next several months. Specific goals of the work include the identification of beneficial use applications, an analysis of the environmental impacts of recycled vs. landfilled gypsum drywall, and the writing of recommendations that might be shared with lawmakers, industry etc. regarding the beneficial use of recycled gypsum. A broad overview of a finished LCA was offered by Malak (which included the development of goal and scope definitions, a lifecycle inventory or LCI analysis, a lifecycle impact assessment, and interpretation of the results). She also reviewed all of the online resources and literature that are being used in the early development of our LCA.

ITS is currently comparing the various end of life management approaches for virgin and recovered gypsum, along with preliminary assumptions and impacts for both the gypsum and the drywall paper bound to it. Cost savings options are also being explored and compared as ITS examines the entire value chain. Findings as they relate to the current EPA WARM waste reduction model are also being examined, and Nicole noted that WARM does not consider the negative aspects of Hydrogen sulfide that is produced when gypsum is deposited in a landfill. The assumption is that WARM could be redefined based on our contractor’s findings to date.

Next, Terry updated the group on the polling results of CDRA members. The main question posed to them was whether features of potential California recycling legislation should be supported, and if so, how soon they felt some of these features might reasonably be implemented. The committee Chair and the Board will soon consider how and whether to respond to Heidi Sanborn of the National Stewardship Council with specifics. Terry then offered Eric Pasewalk of the City of San Francisco the opportunity to provide more information related to a current recycling program that has been implemented in his city, which might be used as a model for future programs in other locations. Information related to minimum waste recycling levels, the mandatory third party verification of those levels and the varying performance at local facilities, existing landfill bans and the need for source separation at some facilities for certain materials in San Francisco to meet the minimum recycling requirements was all reviewed. He also mentioned that debris recovery requirements now also apply to residential construction, not just commercial, and added that the city is keenly interested in finding beneficial uses for the recycled material.

And finally, today’s attendees were polled regarding their impression of the San Francisco recycling program model, and whether they thought a statewide law in CA mandating source separation would be beneficial or not. We hope you will join us for our next meeting on October 9th! And members are welcome to review the meeting recording for a full review of our September meeting. The recording may be found here on Zoom with passcode: D^Z=9mny.