Austria and the United States have some of the highest volumes of municipal solid waste generation per capita worldwide, with each citizen producing on average over 800 kilograms annually. In contrast, municipal solid waste generation in Japan stood around 320 kilograms per capita, according to the latest available data. Global waste management landscape Global municipal waste generation is projected to grow 75 percent between 2020 and 2050, nearing four billion metric tons per annum by the latter year. As such, the importance of efficient disposal methods becomes increasingly critical. In 2020, the largest share of global municipal waste was managed in an uncontrolled manner, often ending up in open dumps. Landfilling accounted for another 30 percent, while less than 20 percent was recycled that year. Leading waste management companies French-based Veolia is by far the largest company in the waste management industry in terms of revenue, with 50 billion U.S. dollars generated in 2023. Across the Atlantic, the U.S. is also home to some of the largest waste management companies in the world, including Waste Management Inc., and Republic Services. Despite the high waste generation rates in developed countries, the growth in waste production is forecast to accelerate faster in low-income regions, presenting new challenges and opportunities for waste management companies worldwide.

In 2022, municipal waste generation in OECD countries was estimated at 530.6 kilograms. The Americas had the highest rate, at roughly 613 kilograms per person. In contrast, OECD countries in Asia Oceania recorded an average of 402 kilograms of municipal waste generated per person.

The average American generated 4.9 pounds of municipal solid waste (MSW) in 2018. This is a considerable increase from 1960, when 2.68 pounds of MSW were generated in the United States per capita.

Municipal solid waste in the U.S.

Commonly referred to as trash, municipal solid waste (MSW) comprises of a variety of materials such as paper, plastics, metals, and food. The volume of MSW generation in the U.S. has increased massively since the 1960s. In that year, less than 90 million tons of materials and products entered the U.S. waste management system from residential, commercial and institutional sources. By 1990, this amount had increased to more than 200 million tons, and most recently in 2018 totaled 292 million tons. The U.S. is one of largest producers of MSW worldwide.

Waste disposal methods in the U.S.

The United States has a number of waste treatment methods to deal with the large volumes of waste generated each year, such as combustion with energy recovery and composting. Recycling has seen considerable growth over the years, but landfilling remains the main disposal method in the U.S.

The United States and Canada were two of the highest per capita generators of municipal solid waste in the world, throwing out about **** kilograms and **** kilograms per day, respectively. Municipal solid waste is defined as the everyday objects thrown out by the public. Globally, humans generate a wide variety of waste types, including plastic waste, food waste, and electronic waste. In terms of e-scrap, the United Kingdom is one of the largest per capita generators in the world, reaching **** kilograms per inhabitant in 2017. Perception of waste Globally, there is a lack of consistency in the way country populations perceive plastic waste and the level of concern they have about waste in the environment. Consumers are also generally divided in the opinion of who should be the most responsible in reducing waste worldwide, whether it be the companies producing and/or selling packaged goods, the government, the consumers, or some combination of all entities. Waste is prevalent in all global economies and the harm that it places on the environment and human health, if not properly disposed of, must be considered in future regulations and policies to allow for sustainable waste management.

China produced **** percent of global municipal solid waste (MSW) generation in 2018. However, when taking population into account the United States creates the most waste. The U.S. represents just **** percent of the global population but was responsible for ***** percent of global waste generation. This was the same share that was generated by India, a country with a population of more than *********** people. Food waste The most common type of waste is food and green waste, making up almost half of globally generated MSW. Every year Americans produce approximately ** billion kilograms of food waste, equating to almost *** kilograms of food waste per capita. Still, this is less than the amount of food waste produced by the average Australian, which stands at more than *** kilograms per year. Environmental impacts The immense volume of waste produced around the world every year has become an increasing cause of environmental pollution. There are many forms of waste pollution, such as methane emissions from food waste that has been landfilled, and toxic chemical leaks from e-waste. But it is plastic waste that has been in the public eye in recent years due to its devastating impact on marine life.

Goal 11Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainableTarget 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slumsIndicator 11.1.1: Proportion of urban population living in slums, informal settlements or inadequate housingEN_LND_SLUM: Proportion of urban population living in slums (%)Target 11.2: By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all, improving road safety, notably by expanding public transport, with special attention to the needs of those in vulnerable situations, women, children, persons with disabilities and older personsIndicator 11.2.1: Proportion of population that has convenient access to public transport, by sex, age and persons with disabilitiesTarget 11.3: By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countriesIndicator 11.3.1: Ratio of land consumption rate to population growth rateIndicator 11.3.2: Proportion of cities with a direct participation structure of civil society in urban planning and management that operate regularly and democraticallyTarget 11.4: Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritageIndicator 11.4.1: Total per capita expenditure on the preservation, protection and conservation of all cultural and natural heritage, by source of funding (public, private), type of heritage (cultural, natural) and level of government (national, regional, and local/municipal)Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters, including water-related disasters, with a focus on protecting the poor and people in vulnerable situationsIndicator 11.5.1: Number of deaths, missing persons and directly affected persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 populationVC_DSR_MISS: Number of missing persons due to disaster (number)VC_DSR_AFFCT: Number of people affected by disaster (number)VC_DSR_MORT: Number of deaths due to disaster (number)VC_DSR_MTMP: Number of deaths and missing persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 population (number)VC_DSR_MMHN: Number of deaths and missing persons attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_DAFF: Number of directly affected persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 population (number)VC_DSR_IJILN: Number of injured or ill people attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_PDAN: Number of people whose damaged dwellings were attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_PDYN: Number of people whose destroyed dwellings were attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_PDLN: Number of people whose livelihoods were disrupted or destroyed, attributed to disasters (number)Indicator 11.5.2: Direct economic loss in relation to global GDP, damage to critical infrastructure and number of disruptions to basic services, attributed to disastersVC_DSR_GDPLS: Direct economic loss attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_LSGP: Direct economic loss attributed to disasters relative to GDP (%)VC_DSR_AGLH: Direct agriculture loss attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_HOLH: Direct economic loss in the housing sector attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_CILN: Direct economic loss resulting from damaged or destroyed critical infrastructure attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_CHLN: Direct economic loss to cultural heritage damaged or destroyed attributed to disasters (millions of current United States dollars)VC_DSR_CDAN: Number of damaged critical infrastructure attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_HFDN: Number of destroyed or damaged health facilities attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_EFDN: Number of destroyed or damaged educational facilities attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_CDYN: Number of other destroyed or damaged critical infrastructure units and facilities attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_BSDN: Number of disruptions to basic services attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_ESDN: Number of disruptions to educational services attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_HSDN: Number of disruptions to health services attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_OBDN: Number of disruptions to other basic services attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_DDPA: Direct economic loss to other damaged or destroyed productive assets attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste managementIndicator 11.6.1: Proportion of municipal solid waste collected and managed in controlled facilities out of total municipal waste generated, by citiesEN_REF_WASCOL: Municipal Solid Waste collection coverage, by cities (%)Indicator 11.6.2: Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (e.g. PM2.5 and PM10) in cities (population weighted)EN_ATM_PM25: Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter in cities, urban population (micrograms per cubic meter)Target 11.7: By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilitiesIndicator 11.7.1: Average share of the built-up area of cities that is open space for public use for all, by sex, age and persons with disabilitiesIndicator 11.7.2: Proportion of persons victim of physical or sexual harassment, by sex, age, disability status and place of occurrence, in the previous 12 monthsTarget 11.a: Support positive economic, social and environmental links between urban, peri-urban and rural areas by strengthening national and regional development planningIndicator 11.a.1: Number of countries that have national urban policies or regional development plans that (a) respond to population dynamics; (b) ensure balanced territorial development; and (c) increase local fiscal spaceSD_CPA_UPRDP: Countries that have national urban policies or regional development plans that respond to population dynamics; ensure balanced territorial development; and increase local fiscal space (1 = YES; 0 = NO)Target 11.b: By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and implement, in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, holistic disaster risk management at all levelsIndicator 11.b.1: Number of countries that adopt and implement national disaster risk reduction strategies in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030SG_DSR_LGRGSR: Score of adoption and implementation of national DRR strategies in line with the Sendai FrameworkSG_DSR_SFDRR: Number of countries that reported having a National DRR Strategy which is aligned to the Sendai FrameworkIndicator 11.b.2: Proportion of local governments that adopt and implement local disaster risk reduction strategies in line with national disaster risk reduction strategiesSG_DSR_SILS: Proportion of local governments that adopt and implement local disaster risk reduction strategies in line with national disaster risk reduction strategies (%)SG_DSR_SILN: Number of local governments that adopt and implement local DRR strategies in line with national strategies (number)SG_GOV_LOGV: Number of local governments (number)Target 11.c: Support least developed countries, including through financial and technical assistance, in building sustainable and resilient buildings utilizing local materials

As of 2022, Michigan was the highest ranking state in terms of waste sent to landfills, per capita. That year, more than ** tons of waste per person ended up in the state's landfills.

U.S. landfills – additional information

A landfill is a site used for the disposal of waste materials. It is considered one of the oldest forms of waste treatment and is used in many places around the world. Landfills in the United States are regulated by each state’s environmental agency, which in turn, follows the guidelines set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

The United States has around ***** landfills, with about *** landfills situated in the West. Overall, the United States generated ***** million tons of municipal solid waste in 2018 – a significant increase from **** million tons in 1960. However, the number of landfills in the U.S. has significantly decreased since 1990 from over ***** to under ***** landfills.

Although recycling rates have improved significantly over the last decades, the United States is far behind leading European countries. Austria and Germany had the highest recycling rates worldwide with ** and ** percent, respectively. Some countries like Austria, the Netherlands and Germany have virtually eliminated landfill disposal as these countries have implemented successful recycling programs and policies. In addition to waste reduction and recycling programs, there are several alternatives to landfills, including waste-to-energy incineration , anaerobic digestion, composting or mechanical biological waste treatments.

The North Carolina State Energy Office in the Department of Administration supported the NC Center for Geographic Information and Analysis to develop a point layer of landfill locations in North Carolina, based on the inventory prepeared by the US EPA Landfill Methane Outreach Program. This set of Landfill Methane Outreach Program (LMOP) Landfill Sites represent sites with methane gas generation potential. Methane gas is a byproduct of solid waste decomposition in landfills. The file identifies landfills in North Carolina from the LMOP Landfill Project, verfied using information provided by the Division of Waste Management, NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources. In addition, CGIA created 10-mile buffers around each landfill point and analyzed company locations within the buffers based on a dataset derived for the State Energy Office by the Appalachian Regional Development Institute at Appalachian State University from a Harris Company commercial database. This data set was created to assist governmental agencies and others in making resource management decisions through use of a Geographic Information System (GIS).

Norway generated the largest amount of municipal waste per capita in Europe in 2023, at *** kilograms per inhabitant. Luxembourg ranked second, also with over *** kilograms per capita. Nevertheless, based on data from the previous year, the average Austrian and Dane had the highest municipal waste generation rates in Europe, at over *** kilograms per capita. How does Europe compare to the rest of the world? High-income European countries such as Norway, Denmark, and Austria have some of the highest municipal waste generation rates worldwide. Nevertheless, the average municipal waste generation in European OECD countries was just below the OECD average, estimated at *** kilograms per capita in 2022. That year, Europeans generated on average *** kilograms less municipal waste than the average American. Trends in municipal waste in the EU In 2023, the EU’s average municipal waste generation stood at *** kilograms per capita, slightly down from *** kilograms per capita a year earlier. This was the second consecutive year of decline after a continual growth between 2014 and 2021. While municipal waste generation grew by **** percent in that period, municipal waste recycling per capita in the EU also increased, by roughly ** percent to some *** kilograms.

Introduction: Developing biomass energy to alleviate the worldwide energy crisis has become a global priority. In order to ensure the optimal utilization of biomass energy, it is necessary to calculate a country’s biomass energy potential, so as to provide support for the formulation of biomass energy macro policies, especially for the sustainable supply of raw materials.Methods: This study constructs the biomass inventory, including crop straw, livestock manure, forest residues and municipal solid waste, and estimates the potential of the biomass energy supply of 31 provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities) in China from 2000 to 2020. The changes in the spatial pattern of the biomass energy supply are explored. Taking 2020 as a targeted year, the spatial patterns of biomass energy density defined as the biomass energy per land area and per rural person is then analyzed.Results: The results show that from 2000 to 2020, China’s biomass energy converted into coal equivalent generally showed a fluctuating upward trend from 139,141.73 × 104 tce in 2000–146,133.20 × 104 tce in 2020, with an average annual growth rate of 0.24%. The biomass energy is dominated by livestock manure and crop straw and the four types of biomass energy show different changes but with an overall upward trend. The spatial patterns of the biomass energy potential are generally uneven, with significant inter-provincial differences and obvious regional differences in cold and hot spots. In 2020, the energy density of the biomass energy potential is characterized by “two highs and two lows,” i.e., the biomass energy density per unit land area is “high in the east and low in the west” and the per capita biomass energy density in rural areas is “high in the north and low in the south”.Discussion: The aims of this study are to assess the capacity of biomass resources in China to support a bio-based economy and provide a reference for China’s biomass energy policy formulation and strategic layout. Research shows that in order to further develop biomass energy, the development and utilization of biomass energy should be promoted in combination with China’s regional characteristics, rational planning and local conditions.

In the last decades, the amount of garbage being disposed in China has soared, reaching approximately ***** million tons as of 2023. During the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the annual amount of garbage had decreased to around *** million tons, declining for the first time in many years. However, this drop was only short-lived, and the amount of garbage disposed in 2021 already exceeded pre-pandemic levels. Pollution and waste in China Being the most populated country in the world with a constantly growing population and economy, China was faced with multiple problems. For example, the increasing vehicle traffic on roads and the low air quality, subsequently the trash volume as well. The issue is particularly severe in prosperous the urban areas, and not to mention the trash imported to China from the rest of the world, which was put to a halt in 2018. Historically, the Chinese garbage handling ideology was landfill, however, due to shortage of land around cities and secondary pollution caused by illegal dumping, especially in rural areas, the ratio of incineration has been increasing in recent years, despite the fact that incineration poses serious health problems to citizens by emitting various toxic by-products. Rise of environmental awareness in China Many of the developed countries in the west have already adopted a more comprehensive way of dealing with waste, emphasizing on reducing the amount of waste produced at the beginning, with attention also put on recycling useful waste. Under the “Made in China 2025” strategic plan, China is trying to follow suit. Fortunately, with the economic growth, the environmental awareness in China is also on the rise, with concern rising especially about disposable or non-recyclable products. Many also consider everyone is responsible to reduce plastic and packaging, including manufacturers, governments, vendors, as well as the consumers themselves. Individuals have also begun to enforce consumer power by buying products made from recycled material and boycotting products which are not and the vendors who sell a lot of such products, whereas other individual actions involved for protecting the environment were reusing of disposable items and paying extra.

In the fiscal year 2023, the average daily volume of waste produced per capita in Japan amounted to around *** grams, a decrease from around *** grams in fiscal year 2022. The total amount of waste generated in the country stood at around ** million metric tons in the same fiscal year, indicating a downwards trend as well. ****************remained the largest type of generated waste in Japan. Waste in JapanThe majority of waste collected in Japan is processed in facilities for incineration, disruption, or recycling. The waste that cannot be either incinerated or recycled is cast into landfill. The volume of final waste disposed in landfill amounted to approximately 3.2 million metric tons. Despite the steady decrease in the amount of final waste, Japan is facing a shortage of landfill sites, as the remaining capacity of landfill sites is shrinking. RecyclingSorting of waste in Japan is usually done by the citizens. Waste must be subdivided into categories for collection and it is not picked up if the strict waste separation rules are not followed. Throughout the past decade, the recycling rate of the total waste remained at around 20 percent. Paper was the material that was most recycled both from the waste collected by municipalities and community groups.

Goal 11Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainableTarget 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slumsIndicator 11.1.1: Proportion of urban population living in slums, informal settlements or inadequate housingEN_LND_SLUM: Proportion of urban population living in slums (%)Target 11.2: By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all, improving road safety, notably by expanding public transport, with special attention to the needs of those in vulnerable situations, women, children, persons with disabilities and older personsIndicator 11.2.1: Proportion of population that has convenient access to public transport, by sex, age and persons with disabilitiesTarget 11.3: By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countriesIndicator 11.3.1: Ratio of land consumption rate to population growth rateIndicator 11.3.2: Proportion of cities with a direct participation structure of civil society in urban planning and management that operate regularly and democraticallyTarget 11.4: Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritageIndicator 11.4.1: Total per capita expenditure on the preservation, protection and conservation of all cultural and natural heritage, by source of funding (public, private), type of heritage (cultural, natural) and level of government (national, regional, and local/municipal)Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters, including water-related disasters, with a focus on protecting the poor and people in vulnerable situationsIndicator 11.5.1: Number of deaths, missing persons and directly affected persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 populationVC_DSR_MISS: Number of missing persons due to disaster (number)VC_DSR_AFFCT: Number of people affected by disaster (number)VC_DSR_MORT: Number of deaths due to disaster (number)VC_DSR_MTMP: Number of deaths and missing persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 population (number)VC_DSR_MMHN: Number of deaths and missing persons attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_DAFF: Number of directly affected persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 population (number)VC_DSR_IJILN: Number of injured or ill people attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_PDAN: Number of people whose damaged dwellings were attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_PDYN: Number of people whose destroyed dwellings were attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_PDLN: Number of people whose livelihoods were disrupted or destroyed, attributed to disasters (number)Indicator 11.5.2: Direct economic loss in relation to global GDP, damage to critical infrastructure and number of disruptions to basic services, attributed to disastersVC_DSR_GDPLS: Direct economic loss attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_LSGP: Direct economic loss attributed to disasters relative to GDP (%)VC_DSR_AGLH: Direct agriculture loss attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_HOLH: Direct economic loss in the housing sector attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_CILN: Direct economic loss resulting from damaged or destroyed critical infrastructure attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_CHLN: Direct economic loss to cultural heritage damaged or destroyed attributed to disasters (millions of current United States dollars)VC_DSR_CDAN: Number of damaged critical infrastructure attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_HFDN: Number of destroyed or damaged health facilities attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_EFDN: Number of destroyed or damaged educational facilities attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_CDYN: Number of other destroyed or damaged critical infrastructure units and facilities attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_BSDN: Number of disruptions to basic services attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_ESDN: Number of disruptions to educational services attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_HSDN: Number of disruptions to health services attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_OBDN: Number of disruptions to other basic services attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_DDPA: Direct economic loss to other damaged or destroyed productive assets attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste managementIndicator 11.6.1: Proportion of municipal solid waste collected and managed in controlled facilities out of total municipal waste generated, by citiesEN_REF_WASCOL: Municipal Solid Waste collection coverage, by cities (%)Indicator 11.6.2: Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter (e.g. PM2.5 and PM10) in cities (population weighted)EN_ATM_PM25: Annual mean levels of fine particulate matter in cities, urban population (micrograms per cubic meter)Target 11.7: By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilitiesIndicator 11.7.1: Average share of the built-up area of cities that is open space for public use for all, by sex, age and persons with disabilitiesIndicator 11.7.2: Proportion of persons victim of physical or sexual harassment, by sex, age, disability status and place of occurrence, in the previous 12 monthsTarget 11.a: Support positive economic, social and environmental links between urban, peri-urban and rural areas by strengthening national and regional development planningIndicator 11.a.1: Number of countries that have national urban policies or regional development plans that (a) respond to population dynamics; (b) ensure balanced territorial development; and (c) increase local fiscal spaceSD_CPA_UPRDP: Countries that have national urban policies or regional development plans that respond to population dynamics; ensure balanced territorial development; and increase local fiscal space (1 = YES; 0 = NO)Target 11.b: By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and implement, in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030, holistic disaster risk management at all levelsIndicator 11.b.1: Number of countries that adopt and implement national disaster risk reduction strategies in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030SG_DSR_LGRGSR: Score of adoption and implementation of national DRR strategies in line with the Sendai FrameworkSG_DSR_SFDRR: Number of countries that reported having a National DRR Strategy which is aligned to the Sendai FrameworkIndicator 11.b.2: Proportion of local governments that adopt and implement local disaster risk reduction strategies in line with national disaster risk reduction strategiesSG_DSR_SILS: Proportion of local governments that adopt and implement local disaster risk reduction strategies in line with national disaster risk reduction strategies (%)SG_DSR_SILN: Number of local governments that adopt and implement local DRR strategies in line with national strategies (number)SG_GOV_LOGV: Number of local governments (number)Target 11.c: Support least developed countries, including through financial and technical assistance, in building sustainable and resilient buildings utilizing local materials

In 2022, around 28.57 billion pounds of production-related TRI-listed chemical waste were managed in the United States. Of this total, 51 percent was recycled, while another 11 percent was managed through disposal methods such as on-site disposals and air releases. Chemicals covered by the U.S. EPA Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) Program include those that impact both human health and the environment.