Estimating the accumulation and re-accumulation of commercial tobacco, electronic cigarette, and cannabis waste based on a stratified random sample of census blocks
2025

Study on Tobacco, E-Cigarette, and Cannabis Waste in San Diego

Sample size: 60 publication 20 minutes Evidence: high

Author Information

Author(s): Matt Georg E., Greiner Lydia, Tran Kristina, Gibbons Joseph, Vingiello Michael, Stigler Granados Paula, Shadbegian Ronald, Novotny Thomas E.

Primary Institution: San Diego State University

Hypothesis

What is the amount and distribution of waste generated by commercial tobacco, electronic cigarettes, and cannabis use in urban areas?

Conclusion

The study found that cigarette butts are the most common type of waste, with significant re-accumulation occurring shortly after cleanups.

Supporting Evidence

  • Cigarette butts accounted for 94% of all TEC waste collected.
  • The study estimated that up to 200 million plastic filters may be discarded annually in the surveyed cities.
  • Re-accumulation of TEC waste occurred rapidly, with similar counts in both survey rounds.
  • Demographic and land use factors explained 78% of the variance in cigarette butt counts.
  • Community-wide policies are necessary to mitigate the environmental impact of TEC waste.

Takeaway

This study looked at how much trash from cigarettes and e-cigarettes is left on the streets, showing that a lot of it comes back quickly after being cleaned up.

Methodology

The study used a stratified random sampling method to select census blocks and conducted two rounds of surveys to measure waste accumulation.

Potential Biases

Potential undercounting of waste due to human error and the focus on visible waste only.

Limitations

The study's sample size was limited to 60 census blocks, which may reduce the precision of estimates, and it only included publicly accessible areas.

Participant Demographics

Census blocks varied in demographics, including age, race, and socioeconomic status.

Statistical Information

P-Value

p<0.0001

Confidence Interval

[3,730,059; 12,968,255]

Statistical Significance

p<0.05

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1371/journal.pone.0313241

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication