ENG  Vol.12 No.2 , February 2020
Water-Borne Wood Preservation and End-of-Life Removal History and Projection
Abstract: Use of water-borne wood preservatives began in approximately the 1950s. Residential and commercial uses rapidly developed for products such as decking, fences, and other outdoor structures. Nearly all such products were treated by preservatives using arsenic as a major ingredient. The most common preservative was chromated copper arsenate (CCA). A smaller volume used ammoniacal copper zinc arsenate (ACZA). Preservative label changes made in 2003 limited uses of these arsenical treatments to industrial or agricultural type uses, such as poles, piles, ties, bridges, and fencing. Use volumes of preservative-treated wood continued to grow after the label change, but the types of preservatives used changed greatly. The amounts of water-borne treated wood reaching end-of-life and being disposed also continued to grow, reflecting the increasing inventory of volume in service. However, the volume of arsenical-treated wood being disposed peaked in approximately 2008 and is now only approximately one-quarter of that volume. Most of the arsenical-treated wood now being disposed consists of large, easily identified and separated pieces, such as round poles, piles, and fence posts and timbers, which can be easily managed separated from other wood construction and demolition (C & D) waste. Thus, managing C & D waste to limit arsenic contamination of potential products, such as mulch, will be much more practical than some have feared.
Cite this paper: Smith, S. (2020) Water-Borne Wood Preservation and End-of-Life Removal History and Projection. Engineering, 12, 117-139. doi: 10.4236/eng.2020.122011.

[1]   AWPI (1997) The 1996 Wood Preserving Industry Statistical Report. American Wood Preservers Institute.

[2]   Smith, S.T. (2005) CCA Treated Wood Production, Uses, and Disposal. Wood Preservatives Science Council, Not Published.

[3]   (2016) Production Volumes and Benefits of CCA-Treated Wood. American Chemistry Council, Biocides Panel, Arsenical Wood Preservers Task Force, Not Published.

[4]   Jones, A.S., Marini, J., Solo-Gabriele, H.M., Robey, N.M. and Townsend, T.G. (2019) Arsenic, Copper, and Chromium from Treated Wood Products in the U.S. Disposal Sector. Waste Management, 87, 731-740.

[5]   AWPI (1996) The 1995 Wood Preserving Industry Statistical Report. American Wood Preservers Institute.

[6]   Micklewright, J.T. (1998) Wood Preservation Statistics 1997. American Wood Preservers’ Association.

[7]   Smith, S.T. (2011) Economics of Treated Wood in Aquatic Environments. In: Morrell, J.J., Brooks, K.M., C.M., Davis, Eds., Managing Treated Wood in Aquatic Environments, Forest Products Society.

[8]   American Wood Protection Association (2018) Book of Standards. AWPA, Birmingham, AL.

[9]   Solo-Gabriele, H., Jones, A., Marini, J., Townsend, T. and Robey, N. (2016) Trends in Waterborne Treated Wood Production and Implications for Wood Waste Disposal. American Wood Protection Association, San Juan, Puerto Rico.

[10]   Saxe, J.K., Wannamaker, E.J., Conklin, S.W., Shupe, T.F. and Beck, B.D. (2007) Evaluating Landfill Disposal of Chromated Copper Arsenate (CCA) Treated Wood and Potential Effects on Groundwater: Evidence from Florida. Chemosphere, 66, 496-504.