Why aren’t we mining landfills for valuable materials like metals and soil?

October 23, 2018

October 23, 2018


Many old dumps contain useful materials. Whether they’re worth extracting depends on how we value other benefits such as preventing pollution and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.


The car tires were abundant and easy to spot. As were newspapers, made from trees with tough cell walls. Then there were tons of soil aged and packed with decomposed garbage from the 1980s, when Madonna belted out “We are living in a material world, and I am a material girl” and Star Wars brought us a future that didn’t seem to include trash cans anywhere.


At the closed Perdido Landfill in Escambia County, Florida, they’re digging into the past to eliminate old garbage that could contaminate groundwater and clear space for future trash. In the process, they’re also mining for any treasure that could help offset the cost of doing so. During its first phase, which ran from 2009 to 2011, the dig uncovered a copious amount of soil that was then used to cover up new trash, a practice required by federal and state regulations.


The project, which will start phase 2 in 2019 or 2020, is a classic case of landfill mining — an intriguing idea to address multiple growing problems worldwide: increasing population, depleting natural resources and climate change.


“I’m a big proponent of mining landfills,” says Mark Roberts, vice president of engineering consulting firm HDR and project manager for the landfill mining work at Perdido. “Garbage real estate is really valuable.”


The biggest challenge to make landfill mining work is economics, experts say. The cost of excavating trash, sorting out valuable materials such as metals and then reburying the rest tends to exceed the revenues from selling recovered materials.


“Resource recovery alone can’t justify these projects financially,” says Joakim Krook, associate professor in the Department of Management and Engineering at Linköping University in Sweden. “They need to have alternative benefits.”


However, if alternative benefits such as the value of preventing pollution, lowering greenhouse gas emissions, reducing the need to mine new materials, and making room at an old dumpsite for modern, more environmentally friendly waste disposal are factored in, landfill mining in some cases becomes an attractive option.


Making Room


Landfill mining can be traced back to a 1953 project in Israel to find fertilizers for orchards by scooping up soil from decomposed trash.

Few other projects were reported until the 1990s when, in an effort to prevent groundwater contamination and other pollution, new regulation in the U.S. required landfill owners to use plastic liners and soil to sandwich the garbage like a layer cake.


The national effort to modernize garbage dumps shut down many old landfills and required 30-year monitoring of closed dumps for groundwater contamination and methane gas production. It also forced communities to look for new space for landfills.


Other goals include eliminating a potential source of pollution, reclaiming valuable materials and acquiring waste to burn to generate steam and electricity. Digging up closed landfills to make room for new ones has been one of the goals behind some of the landfill mining projects that have sprung up since the 1990s. Other goals include eliminating a potential source of pollution, reclaiming valuable materials and acquiring waste to burn to generate steam and electricity, says Jeremy O’Brien, director of applied research at the Solid Waste Association of North America, an industry trade group.


The U.S. has seen sporadic projects scattered across the country with a variety of primary goals. For example, the main goal of a 1989 project in Connecticut was to move waste from an unlined cell to a lined one, and a 2000 effort in Iowa aimed mainly to protect groundwater and recover space.


Costs and Benefits


The costs and benefits of landfill mining can vary so widely that projects that aren’t deemed cost effective in one place could be considered worthwhile elsewhere.


The city of Denton, Texas, for instance, scrapped a project to excavate a 30-acre (12-hectare) site last year after determining that it wasn’t going to generate nearly as much revenues from selling recyclable materials, such as metals and plastics and creating new landfill space as had been anticipated back in 2015.


In southern Maine, on the other hand, a four-year reclamation work that began in 2011 created an estimated US$7.42 million worth of recovered metals, according to Travis Wagner, professor of environmental science and policy at the University of Southern Maine and co-author of a study of the project that was published in the journal Waste Management. A private scrap-metal company contracted with Ecomaine, the nonprofit owner of the landfill, to mine metals from the site.


The project dug up 34,352 metric tons (37,867 tons) of metals at an estimated cost of US$158 per metric ton. In addition to the value of the metals, Wagner pegged the economic value of the newly created landfill space at US$267,000.


The landfill wasn’t your typical garbage pile, however. It was a space reserved for the ash created by a nearby incinerator that vaporized trash from the regular landfill onsite, such as auto parts and mattress springs, to produce electricity. The process creates the ash with a concentrated amount of metals. The ash also contains metals that are uniformly distributed in the pile. The metals included steel, silver, copper and aluminum.


“At a regular landfill, the metals aren’t uniform, and to get to the metal, you have to get rid of a lot of nasty crap and rocks. It’s expensive to process that waste,” Wagner says. “If you want to mine something, you want to know exactly what the metals are and their concentration.”


Soil and Space


The Escambia County project dug up mostly soil made from decomposed organic materials mixed with dirt used to cover the garbage. Roberts says the soil is valuable because it could be used to cover trash in the adjacent, active part of the landfill. Reusing the soil reduces the need to buy and truck in soil from elsewhere. The ability to rebury unwanted trash in the newer section of the landfill also helped to lower the project’s cost.


“A lot of the economics of it is due to transportation — you don’t have to haul mined garbage across the county,” Roberts says. Even so, the soil was only the second-most valuable item recovered. First was the room for more garbage. “The value is not necessarily in the recovered materials. It’s the air space you will gain — that’s worth a fortune,” he says.


The first phase of the project cost US$2.7 million in mining and processing the long-buried waste, and another US$3 million to build new landfill space of 2.8 million cubic yards (2.1 million cubic meters), Roberts says. That new space will bring in US$60 million in fees charged to haulers. Overall, the return on the investment is at least fivefold, he says.


Similarly, a 2015 project in Washington State didn’t generate a lot of money from recovered metals, mostly unidentifiable rusty pieces, but it cleared out space for a new stormwater detention pond and created a new landfill space, or cell, in the pond’s former location.

“It was not a spectacular success in terms of recovering resources. However, we did successfully relocate the waste into a modern cell to mitigate risk to the environment,” says Pat McLaughlin, director of solid waste division for King County, which operates the Cedar Hills Regional Landfill. “We were able to upgrade our stormwater detention system and increase landfill capacity in the new cell.”


The project took place in part of Cedar Hills that began burying trash in the 1970s, next to an area built to modern standards. The project provided good lessons for the county to experiment with excavating and relocating old garbage, an undertaking that could be under consideration in the future, McLaughlin says.


Shifting the Balance


Currently landfill mining projects are few and far between. However, some see that due to change.


A good number of academic and government-funded research projects in Europe, including in the United Kingdom, Belgium, Sweden and Germany, are working to shift the cost-benefit balance of mining materials from landfills by bringing down the sorting costs and factoring in the value of the environmental benefits that can be gained. Projects range from improving the technology for sorting and recovering materials to calculating environmental benefits, such as reducing greenhouse gas emissions, from using previously mined materials, says Krook.


“Right now, I would generally say that there’s a lot of landfill capacity out there. When supply starts to dwindle then you will see more interest in this.” – Jeremy O’Brien


Available landfill space plays a role, too. Trash generation is rising globally and projected to increase by 70 percent and reach 3.4 billion metric tons (3.7 billion tons) per year by 2050, according to the World Bank. The upward global trend is echoed in the United States, which has seen the amount garbage from cities and counties grow from 217.3 million tons (197.1 million metric tons) in 1995 to 262.4 million tons (238.0 million metric tons) in 2015, the most recent data available, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

“Right now, I would generally say that there’s a lot of landfill capacity out there. When supply starts to dwindle then you will see more interest in this,” O’Brien says.


While landfill mining can create values beyond pure profits, for now the waste management industry is paying more attention to solving sustainability problems through promoting recycling and other efforts that divert trash from landfills.


“It always seems silly that we put in all this energy to produce these materials and goods, and then we dispose perfectly good materials,” Wagner says. “Meanwhile, we are mining and producing more virgin materials.”



O’Brien echoes the sentiment. “Once we stop new materials from reaching landfills, then we can focus on reclaiming old ones,” he says. 

Ucilia Wang is a California-based environment and technology journalist. Ensia is an independent, nonprofit magazine presenting new perspectives on environmental challenges and solutions to a global audience. Their mission is to share stories and ignite conversations that motivate and empower people to create a more sustainable future. The article is reposted here under the terms of Creative Commons’ Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported license.


NERC welcomes Guest Blog submissions. To inquire about submitting articles contact Megan Schulz-Fontes. Disclaimer: Guest blogs represent the opinion of the writers and may not reflect the policy or position of the Northeast Recycling Council, Inc.

Share Post

By Nancy Dzija Vaughan | Prime Publishers August 12, 2026
BETHLEHEM – First Selectman Raymond Butkus provided an update to the Board of Selectmen last Tuesday that included an announcement regarding the disposal of tires at the transfer station. Mr. Butkus said the CT Tire Stewardship program has gone into effect, According to the Northeast Recycling Council website, “the Connecticut Tire Stewardship (CTS) is the nonprofit organization responsible for implementing Connecticut’s Tire Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program. Working with municipal transfer stations, tire retailers, auto shops, car dealerships, and other collection partners, CTS helps ensure discarded tires are responsibly collected, recycled, and put to beneficial new uses.” The website goes on to state, “Approximately 3.5 million tires reach the end of their useful life in Connecticut each year. Through its statewide Roll Recycle Renew program, CTS provides residents with free tire recycling opportunities while giving municipalities a practical solution for managing scrap tires. By making responsible disposal more accessible, the program helps reduce illegal dumping, protect waterways and natural resources, and keep tires out of landfills.” Mr. Butkus said town residents will now be able to bring most tires to the town transfer at no cost. Tires will be accepted both on and off the rim. The exception is large tractor tires, tires for construction equipment, or excessively dirty tires. These tires will still ne accepted, however, there will be a fee for disposal. Mr. Butkus also reported that he held a meeting last week regarding the rewiring of the computer equipment at Town Hall. The project is expected to begin this week and will likely be completed by August 20. A new monitor has been located in the hallway of Town Hall. This monitor will be used to display a list of upcoming meetings along with announcements and photographs. Read on Prime Publishers .
By Erin Finan | Recycling Today August 12, 2026
The Northeast Recycling Council (NERC) has released its 2026 Northeast States Policy Guide, a new regional resource that provides a comprehensive comparison of sustainable materials management policies across 11 states in the Northeastern U.S. “The guide serves as an excellent primer for state and industry stakeholders looking to learn about the various policy frameworks enacted across the Northeast and how they have been applied,” says NERC President Michael Nork, who also works as an environmental analyst for the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services. Developed through a standardized survey of state government agencies, NERC says the guide serves as a practical reference for policymakers, municipal leaders, industry professionals and researchers looking to navigate and compare policies related to waste reduction, reuse, recycling and circular economy initiatives. The publication includes both regional policy analyses and detailed state profiles covering product bans, product stewardship (including extended producer responsibility), minimum postconsumer recycled content requirements, mandatory recycling laws and disposal bans. “This resource provides high-level insight into materials of interest that the Northeast has focused on managing for decades,” says Shannon McDonald, director at Maryland Department of the Environment in the Waste Diversion Division. “For a regulatory agency, specific resources that provide clear examples of replicable or considerable policy and management strategies are useful tools—having them in one place is even more valuable.” The guide compiles state-level data across Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and Vermont to highlight core regional policy trends, including: regional policy prevalence-- Regulatory frameworks are established across the region, with 10 of 11 states using product stewardship programs, 10 enforcing disposal bans and nine maintaining mandatory recycling laws; broadest state coverage -- Maine and Vermont regulate the widest variety of items in the region, 20 and 21, respectively, followed closely by New Jersey at 19 categories; top regulated materials -- Electronics are the most widely addressed material (regulated by 10 states), followed by mercury thermostats (9 states), tires (8 states), as well as paint, rechargeable batteries, beverage containers, fluorescent lighting, lead-acid batteries, mercury-added products and yard waste (7 states); funding and mechanism structures -- Among the region’s product stewardship programs, 47 percent are producer-funded, 15 percent rely on consumer point-of-sale eco-fees, 5 percent combine producer and consumer fees and 33 percent utilize alternative measures such as labeling, recyclability standards or disclosure requirements; and regulatory gaps and emerging opportunities -- Significant policy gaps exist in rapidly growing clean-energy waste streams. Currently, only one state addresses electric vehicle (EV) batteries, and zero states have statewide policy programs for solar panels. Unfilled coverage areas present opportunities for cross-state collaboration, policy alignment and regional innovation. By presenting data in a standardized format for each state, the guide enables stakeholders to easily compare regional policy approaches, identify coverage gaps and adapt regulatory models. “By standardizing how we measure product stewardship, PCR [postconsumer recyclables] mandates and disposal bans across all 11 states, this guide allows state leaders to quickly identify where their policies align with neighbors and where transferable models already exist,” says Mariane Medeiros, director of strategic engagement and sustainability programs at NERC. “With 10 of 11 states enforcing stewardship programs and disposal bans, the region has proven its ability to manage complex products. The next frontier is applying that same collaborative momentum to rapidly growing clean-energy waste streams like solar panels and EV batteries.” Read on Recycling Today.
By Mariane Medeiros August 6, 2026
The Northeast Recycling Council (NERC) is pleased to announce the release of the 2026 Northeast States Policy Guide , a new regional resource that provides a comprehensive comparison of sustainable materials management policies across eleven Northeast states. “The guide serves as an excellent primer for state and industry stakeholders looking to learn about the various policy frameworks enacted across the northeast and how they have been applied,” said NERC President, Michael Nork, Environmental Analyst, New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services. Developed through a standardized survey of state government agencies, the guide serves as a practical reference for policymakers, municipal leaders, industry professionals, and researchers seeking to navigate and compare policies related to waste reduction, reuse, recycling, and circular economy initiatives. The publication includes both regional policy analyses and detailed state profiles covering product bans, product stewardship (including Extended Producer Responsibility), minimum post-consumer recycled content requirements, mandatory recycling laws, and disposal bans. “This resource provides high level insight into materials of interest that the Northeast has focused on managing for decades. For a regulatory agency, specific resources that provide clear examples of replicable or considerable policy and management strategies are useful tools--having them in one place is even more valuable,” said Shannon McDonald, Waste Diversion Division, Director at Maryland Department of the Environment. Key Findings The guide aggregates state-level data across Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont to highlight core regional policy trends: Regional Policy Prevalence: Regulatory frameworks are widely established across the region, with 10 of 11 states using product stewardship programs, 10 enforcing disposal bans, and 9 maintaining mandatory recycling laws. Broadest State Coverage: Maine and Vermont regulate the widest variety of items in the region, 20 and 21, respectively, distinct material categories through state policies, followed closely by New Jersey at 19 categories. Top Regulated Materials: Electronics are the most widely addressed material (regulated by 10 states), followed by mercury thermostats (9 states), tires (8 states), followed by paint, rechargeable batteries, beverage containers, fluorescent lighting, lead-acid batteries, mercury-added products and yard waste (7 states). Funding & Mechanism Structures: Among the region’s product stewardship programs, 47% are producer-funded, 15% rely on consumer point-of-sale eco-fees, 5% combine producer and consumer fees, and 33% utilize alternative measures such as labeling, recyclability standards, or disclosure requirements. Regulatory Gaps & Emerging Opportunities: Significant policy gaps exist in rapidly growing clean-energy waste streams. Currently, only 1 state addresses electric vehicle (EV) batteries, and zero states have statewide policy programs for solar panels. Unfilled coverage areas present distinct opportunities for cross-state collaboration, policy alignment, and regional innovation. By presenting data in a standardized format for each state, the guide enables stakeholders to easily compare regional policy approaches, identify coverage gaps, and adapt proven regulatory models. "By standardizing how we measure product stewardship, PCR mandates, and disposal bans across all eleven states, this guide allows state leaders to quickly identify where their policies align with neighbors and where transferrable models already exist," said Mariane Medeiros, Director of Strategic Engagement and Sustainability Programs at NERC. "With 10 of 11 states enforcing stewardship programs and disposal bans, the region has proven its ability to manage complex products. The next frontier is applying that same collaborative momentum to rapidly growing clean-energy waste streams like solar panels and EV batteries." Alyssa Eiklor, Board Member and Environmental Analyst at Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation, cited: “The NERC Policy Guide provides a valuable comparison of the similarities and differences in how northeastern states use policies as a tool for waste management. It also serves as a convenient short cut for linking directly to the policies.” The full 2026 Northeast States Policy Guide is available for download at: https://www.nerc.org/state-policy-guide About NERC The Northeast Recycling Council, Inc. (NERC) is a multi-state nonprofit organization committed to minimizing waste, conserving natural resources, and advancing a sustainable economy through collaboration and action. NERC's eleven member states and advisory members work together to address sustainable materials management challenges and promote solutions across the Northeast region.