EPA GHGRP · reporting year 2023 · Waste

Cumberland County Solid Waste Management - rising reported GHG

According to the EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), Scope 1 emissions reported across 1 reporting facility in 1 state.

MT CO₂e (latest facility reports)
75K
Reporting facilities
1
States covered
1
Overall rank
#1254
Watchlist RSS for this company

Data updated May 2026

75K MT CO₂e · 2023

Cumberland County Solid Waste Management reported emissions rose 95.9% since 2011 to 75K MT CO₂e in 2023.

  • Overall rank #1254 of 2,289
  • #243 in Waste
  • +95.9% since 2011

Cumberland County Solid Waste Management vs all U.S. GHGRP parent companies

Where this parent's reported Scope 1 CO₂e sits among every EPA GHGRP-reporting company

75,196 1254th of 2289 higher than 1,035 of 2,289 companies

GHGRP parent companies, banded by reported CO₂e (MT)

Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more companies. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count and share, and where it sits relative to this entry.

Source EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program · 2023

How Cumberland County Solid Waste Management spreads its footprint vs Waste peers

Facility count against total reported CO₂e for 21 Waste companies. A company can lead its sector from one concentrated site or from many smaller ones; the split below uses the median of this peer group (5 facilities, 0.7M MT).

Median split: 5 facilities, 0.7M MT CO₂e among Waste peers. 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 21 entities by Reporting facilities (X) and Total CO₂e (million MT) (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. Large & distributedFew sites, outsized footprintMany sites, modest footprintSmall & concentrated 050100150200250 0M5M10M15M Reporting facilities Total CO₂e (million MT) Facility count vs. total reported CO₂e, Waste
Median split: 5 facilities, 0.7M MT CO₂e among Waste peers.

You are here: Cumberland County Solid Waste Management.

Waste peer footprint table: Cumberland County Solid Waste Management, 1 facilities, 0.08M MT CO2e. Waste Management, 225 facilities, 11.65M MT CO2e. Republic Services, 177 facilities, 10.72M MT CO2e. Covanta Holding, 22 facilities, 4.2M MT CO2e. Waste Connections US, 40 facilities, 3.63M MT CO2e. Gfl Environmental Holdings (us), 30 facilities, 2.45M MT CO2e. Wheelabrator Technologies Holdings, 12 facilities, 2.22M MT CO2e. Rumpke Consolidated Cos, 9 facilities, 1.69M MT CO2e. County of Orange California, 5 facilities, 1.13M MT CO2e. County of Lycoming Pennsylvania, 1 facilities, 0.9M MT CO2e. County of Pinellas Florida, 2 facilities, 0.77M MT CO2e. Apex Environmental, 1 facilities, 0.7M MT CO2e. County of Brevard Florida, 1 facilities, 0.67M MT CO2e. City of El Paso Texas, 2 facilities, 0.54M MT CO2e. Waste Connections, 8 facilities, 0.51M MT CO2e. City of Baton Rouge Louisiana, 2 facilities, 0.51M MT CO2e. Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County Florida, 3 facilities, 0.5M MT CO2e. City of Dallas Texas, 1 facilities, 0.48M MT CO2e. Casella Waste Systems, 9 facilities, 0.46M MT CO2e. County of Polk Florida, 1 facilities, 0.43M MT CO2e. US Government, 9 facilities, 0.42M MT CO2e.

EPA GHGRP inventory plate

Parent cumberland-county-solid-waste-management · 2023 #1254 · 75K MT

CO2E-THIN · MID-PACK · PHOTO-FINISH · FAC-SINGLE · SPAN-HOME · SECTOR-WASTE · TREND-SURGE · BOOK-RICH

  • CO2E-THIN 75K MT
  • MID-PACK #1254/2289
  • PHOTO-FINISH County of Stafford Vi… · Waste
  • FAC-SINGLE 1 facility
  • SPAN-HOME 1 state
  • SECTOR-WASTE Waste
  • TREND-SURGE +96% since 2011
  • BOOK-RICH 7/8 fields

Nearest CO₂e peer: County of Stafford Virginia · Waste (±1 MT)

Instrument codes from this parent’s EPA GHGRP rollup: CO₂e band, corpus rank, photo-finish peer, facility book, state span, sector, trend, and book completeness. Not an EPA grade or compliance rating.

2023 methane-weighted parent mix

Methane leads the non-CO₂ share for Cumberland County Solid Waste Management: CH₄ is 100% of 75K MT CO₂e in 2023 (N₂O 0%). Non-CO₂ gases total 100%. Component shares sum this parent's facility CO₂ / CH₄ / N₂O rows for that year, not a corporate Scope 1-3 inventory.

CO₂
-
n/r
CH₄
100%
75K MT
N₂O
-
n/r

CO₂e neighbourhood around Cumberland County Solid Waste Management

Lowest and highest poles plus nearest reported parents by CO₂e, not a full GHGRP corpus board reprint.

Vistra · Power Plants · high…86.3MRector & Visitors of… · Othe…75KSchnitzer Steel Indus… · Met…75KCounty of Stafford Vi… · Was…75KCumberland County Sol… · Was…75KAnchor Hocking · Minerals · …75KPelican Renewables · Other ·…0
EPA GHGRP parent CO₂e · neighbourhood around Cumberland County Solid Waste Management · May 2026

Emissions growth across reporting years

Cumberland County Solid Waste Management - rising annual GHG

EPA GHGRP 2011–2023 · million metric tons CO₂e

Reported CO₂e in 2023
75K MT
13 annual EPA GHGRP reporting records
0.03M0.04M0.05M0.06M0.07M0.08M0.09M 2011201320152017201920212023 0.08M

Cumberland County Solid Waste Management annual reported GHG emissions, 2011–2023

Source: EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) As of Reporting year 2023

Cumberland County Solid Waste Management reported 75K MT CO₂e in 2023, compared with 38K MT in 2011 - a rise of 95.9% across the EPA GHGRP reporting record.

Facilities (1)

Facility Emissions (MT CO2e)
CUMBERLAND COUNTY ANN STREET LANDFILL
Waste
FAYETTEVILLE, NC
75K

Nationwide parents with similar GHGRP profiles

Three EPA GHGRP-derived peer sets for Cumberland County Solid Waste Management. The CO₂e neighbourhood chart above shows poles; these links are navigable comparison paths beyond Waste browse pages.

Source: EPA GHGRP Data is based on facility self-reporting. Not environmental compliance advice

What to do with this

Using Cumberland County Solid Waste Management's emissions profile

  • Cumberland County Solid Waste Management runs mid-intensity per facility (75K MT CO₂e/site); see how it stacks up against the rest of the Waste sector on the Waste industry page.
  • It ranks #1254 of 2,289 reporting parents nationwide, compare it directly against specific peers on the compare tool.
  • Not sure how to read a total-CO₂e figure or a per-facility intensity number, the how-to-read guide walks through what each field means and what it doesn't.

Related reading: How to read an emissions profile · Waste emitters · Methodology

Disclaimer: This information is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. Data is sourced from the EPA Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP). Consult a qualified professional before making decisions based on this data.