+353-1-416-8900REST OF WORLD
+44-20-3973-8888REST OF WORLD
1-917-300-0470EAST COAST U.S
1-800-526-8630U.S. (TOLL FREE)

Opportunity Assessment of Waste Management in US Cities - by Waste Management Outlook (Budget, Programs, Volume, and Disposal Statistics), Key Initiatives, and Cities (Boston, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Seattle, and San Diego) - Forecast to 2023

  • PDF Icon


  • 136 Pages
  • May 2019
  • Region: United States
  • Markets and Markets
  • ID: 4773480

Increasing focus on waste recycling and energy generation and adoption of IoT-based smart waste management systems to drive the market

Seattle, a major city in the US, has increased its overall recycling rate for 13 consecutive years (2003–2016). In 2016, Seattle recycled 58.8% of its municipal solid waste with an annual increase of 0.8%. The city aims to achieve an overall 70% recycling rate by 2022. Key factors driving the waste management assessment in the select major US cities include an increasing focus on the collection of waste materials and transportation to recycling facilities, sorting material type and selling them to manufacturers to make new products, state governments’ increasing focus on waste recycling and energy generation, and increasing adoption of smart waste management systems.

Increasing focus on waste recycling to provide growth opportunities

Population explosion, coupled with improved lifestyle, results in increased generation of solid wastes in urban as well as rural areas. In US cities, there is a marked distinction between the solid waste from urban and rural areas. However, due to increased urbanization, fast adoption of ‘use & throw concept’ and equally fast communication the gap between the two is diminishing. The solid waste from rural areas is more of a biodegradable nature and the same from urban areas contains more non-biodegradable components, such as plastics and packaging. Recycling organic materials which include food and compostable paper is the biggest opportunity to reduce trash and focus on recycling initiatives. Organics make up about one-quarter of overall trash, and few people are taking part in organics recycling programs yet. The increasing focus on vendors toward organic waste in the region is expected to provide growth opportunities for the market vendors.

Increasing adoption of IoT-based smart waste management systems to improve assessment capabilities

Internet and its applications have become an integral part and essential tools in smart waste management to increase the overall efficiency and reduce operational costs. Owing to increasing demand and necessity, the implementation of smart waste management using IoT assures the collection of the garbage soon as the garbage level reaches its maximum level. The system will thus provide accurate reports, increasing the efficiency of the system. The real-time monitoring of the garbage level with the help of sensors and wireless communication reduces the total number of trips required of garbage collecting vehicles and the total expenditure associated with the garbage collection. Thus, the dustbins will be cleared as and when filled, giving way to better infrastructure and increased hygiene.

In-depth interviews were conducted with the Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), marketing directors, other innovation and technology directors, and executives from various key organizations operating in the waste management market to figure out assessment opportunities for key cities in the US.

  • By Company: Tier 1 – 20%, Tier 2 – 55%, and Tier 3 – 25%
  • By Designation: C-Level – 50%, Director Level – 25%, and Others – 25%
  • By Region: North America – 60%, Europe – 20%, APAC – 10%, and RoW – 10%

Major vendors offering waste management systems include Bigbelly, Inc. (US), Compology (US), OnePlus Systems (US), Ecube Labs (South Korea), Waste Management Inc. (US), Republic Services Inc. (US), Covanta Holding Corporation (US), Recology (US), Athens Services (US), and Bin-e (Poland). The study includes an in-depth competitive analysis of the key players in the waste management market, along with their projects and investments, recent developments, and key market strategies. Market players have embraced different strategies to bring innovative solutions to expand their global presence and increase their market shares. The vendors have focused on IoT-based sensors to deploy innovative waste recycling and energy generation systems.

Research coverage
The waste management opportunity assessment primarily focuses on key cities in the US. Other regions where the study is conducted include Sweden and China.

Key Benefits of the report

  • The report would help the market leaders/new entrants in the market with the information on the closest approximations of the revenue numbers for the overall waste management market and its subsegments.
  • The report would help stakeholders understand the competitive landscape and gain insights to better position their businesses and plan suitable go-to-market strategies.
  • It would also help stakeholders understand the pulse of the market and provide them with information on the key market drivers, restraints, challenges, and opportunities.

Table of Contents

1 Introduction
1.1 Objective of the Study
1.2 Market Definition
1.3 Market Scope
1.4 Stakeholders
1.5 Limitations
1.5.1 City Wise Limitations
2 Research Methodology
2.1 Research Data
2.1.1 Secondary Data
2.1.1 Primary Data
2.2 Market Breakup and Data Triangulation
2.3 Factor Analysis
2.4 Research Assumptions
3 Executive Summary
3.1 Analysis By City
3.2 Waste Management in the US – Key Insights
3.3 Key Takeaways – Philadelphia
3.4 Key Takeaways – Seattle
3.5 Key Takeaways – Los Angeles
3.6 Key Takeaways – San Diego
3.7 Key Takeaways – Boston
3.8 Vendor Analysis
3.8.1 Smart Waste and Recycling System and Vendors
3.8 Promising Technologies in Global Smart Waste and Recycling
4 Waste Management – Current Status
4.1 US Garbage Composition
4.2 Waste Management in US Cities: Statistics
4.3 Zero Waste Management: Key Initiatives and Goals
4.4 Key Policy Insights
4.4.1 Pollution Prevention Act, 1990
5 Opportunity Assessment of Waste Management in US Cities: Sweden and San Francisco
5.1 Sweden
5.1.1 Sweden: Waste Management Statistics
5.1.2 Sweden: Waste Management Methods
5.1.3 Sweden: Waste Treatment Hierarchy
5.1.4 Sweden: Recycling Initiatives
5.2 San Francisco
5.2.1 San Francisco: Recycling Initiatives
5.2.2 San Francisco: Advantages and Disadvantages of Recycling Initiatives
6 Opportunity Analysis By City
6.1 Philadelphia
6.1.1 Philadelphia: Waste Volume Statistics
6.1.2 Stakeholders
6.1.3 Waste Management Journey in Philadelphia Waste Management Inc. and Covanta are the Key Vendors Handling Waste Management Activities in Philadelphia Philadelphia is Paying Nearly USD 34.77 M to Its Waste Management Vendors in 2018
6.1.4 Waste Management Statistics
6.1.5 Waste Management Programs
6.1.6 Market Dynamics
6.1.7 Key Contacts in Philadelphia
6.2 Seattle
6.2.1 Seattle: Waste Volume Statistics
6.2.2 Stakeholders
6.2.3 Waste Management Journey in Seattle Waste Management Inc. and Recology are Seattle's Waste Management Partners for Nearly 20 Years Indicating Strong Association
6.2.4 Waste Management Statistics
6.2.5 Waste Management Programs
6.2.6 Market Dynamics
6.2.7 Key Contacts in Seattle
6.3 Los Angeles
6.3.1 Los Angeles: Waste Volume Statistics Waste Diversion to Reach 1.58 M Tons By 2021
6.3.2 Stakeholders
6.3.3 Waste Management Journey in Los Angeles
6.3.4 Waste Management Statistics
6.3.5 Waste Management Programs
6.3.6 Market Dynamics
6.3.7 Key Contacts in Los Angeles
6.4 San Diego
6.4.1 San Diego: Waste Volume Statistics Food and Organics Sectors to Contribute More Than 30% to the Total Waste Collected
6.4.2 Stakeholders
6.4.3 Waste Management Journey in San Diego
6.4.4 Waste Management Statistics
6.4.5 Waste Management Programs
6.4.6 Market Dynamics
6.4.7 Key Contacts: San Diego
6.5 Boston
6.5.1 Boston: Waste Volume Statistics Boston Achieved 21% Residential & 25% Commercial Recycling Rates in Fy17
6.5.2 Stakeholders
6.5.3 Waste Management Journey in Boston
6.5.4 Waste Management Statistics
6.5.5 Waste Management Programs
6.5.6 Market Dynamics
7 Appendix
7.1 Philadelphia Appendix – Major Waste Categories
7.2 Seattle Appendix - Waste Segregation
7.3 Seattle Appendix – Vendor Compensation
7.4 LA Appendix– Citywide Curbside Recycling Program: Household Recyclable Materials Guide
7.5 San Diego Appendix – Franchised Hauler List
List of Tables (15 Tables)
Table 1 US Garbage Composition: By Waste Material Type, 2018
Table 2 Key Vendors Handling Waste Management Activities in Philadelphia Since 2012
Table 3 Bigbelly Program in Philadelphia: Indicating City’s Careful Planning
Table 4 Key Contacts in Philadelphia
Table 5 Seattle: Residential Programs (Single Family & Multifamily)
Table 6 Key Contacts in Seattle
Table 7 Major Disposal Facilities in Los Angeles
Table 8 Accounts Per Hauler
Table 9 Key Contacts in Los Angeles
Table 10 Key Contacts in San Diego
Table 11 Economic Benefits of Recycling
Table 12 Boston has Designed New Services, Rules and Outreach / Awareness Initiatives for Residential and Commercial Segments
Table 13 LA Appendix – Contractual Charges and Rates
Table 14 San Diego Appendix – Franchised Hauler List
Table 15 San Diego Appendix - Proposed Programs for 75% Diversion By 2020
List of Figures (32 Figures)
Figure 1 Breakdown of Primary Interviews: By Company, Designation, and Region
Figure 2 Promising Technologies in Global Smart Waste and Recycling
Figure 3 US Garbage Composition: By Waste Material Type, 2018 (% Share)
Figure 4 Waste Treatment Hierarchy in Sweden
Figure 5 Philadelphia Gross Municipal Waste, 2013-2017 (In Million Tons)
Figure 6 Philadelphia Waste Management Outlook (2014)
Figure 7 Philadelphia Waste Management Statistics (2016-2018)
Figure 8 Seattle Solid Waste Generated By Sector, 2011-2016 (Thousand Tons)
Figure 9 Seattle Waste Management By Method, 2011-2016 (Thousand Tons)
Figure 10 Solid Waste Fund, 2015-2018 (USD Million)
Figure 11 Cost Allocation By Segment (2017)
Figure 12 Cost Allocation By Expenses Head
Figure 13 Spending By Major Category (2017)
Figure 14 Seattle Waste Management Goals 2017-2022
Figure 15 Los Angeles Waste Generation By Segment (2013)
Figure 16 Los Angeles Waste Volume Statistics, 2017-2021 (Million Tons)
Figure 17 Los Angeles Waste Disposed of By Locations (2016)
Figure 18 Los Angeles Commercial Waste Generated By Business Group (2014)
Figure 19 Los Angeles Solid Waste Collection and Disposal Budget (USD M), 2016-2019
Figure 20 Accounts (%) By Haulers
Figure 21 San Diego: Waste Disposal By Sector (2013)
Figure 22 San Diego: Waste Volume Statists, 2013
Figure 23 San Diego: Waste Volume Handled By Haulers in Commercial and Multi-Family Segments, 2013 (Thousand Tons)
Figure 24 San Diego Contribution of General Fund for Waste Collection, 2016-2018 (USD Million)
Figure 25 San Diego Automated Refuse Container Fund, 2016-2018 (USD Million)
Figure 26 San Diego Contribution of Enterprise Fund for Waste Management Initiatives, 2016-2018 (USD Million)
Figure 27 San Diego Zero Waste Goals (2020-2040)
Figure 29 Boston Residential Waste Management in Boston, 2013 – 2017 (Thousand Tons)
Figure 29 Boston Residential Disposal Composition By Type (2016)
Figure 30 Boston Commercial Disposal Composition By Type (2016)
Figure 31 Boston Waste Reduction Budget, 2013-2018 (USD Million)
Figure 32 Seattle Proposed Monthly Compensation to Waste Management Inc. for Waste Collection in 2019 (Total Collection Payment: USD 2.5m)

Companies Mentioned

  • Athens Services (US)
  • Bigbelly Inc. (US)
  • Bin-e (Poland)
  • Compology (US)
  • Covanta Holding Corporation (US)
  • Ecube Labs (South Korea)
  • OnePlus Systems (US)
  • Recology (US)
  • Republic Services Inc. (US)
  • Waste Management Inc. (US)