Category: Waste Management

Introduction

The rapid economic development of Australia has underlined the necessity to minimize the impact of human activities on the environment. Scientists and public administrators pay close attention to waste management. One can say that the increasing dependence on landfills is one of the problems that should be addressed by policy-makers.

This paper is aimed at showing that people recover energy from waste, rather than deposit it in landfills. This is the main thesis that should be elaborated. Overall, this strategy has several important advantages that can be of great value to Australian community.

In particular, it can reduce water, air and soil pollution caused by disposing of refuse in landfills. Secondly, this approach can decrease the cost of energy, and this opportunity is important for the economic sustainability of the country. Finally, in the future, this approach can improve the use of land in various urban areas. These are the main aspects that can be singled out.

The challenges associated with landfills

In order to examine this topic, one should first illustrate the problems that are associated with landfills in Australia. It should be mentioned that during the period between 2001 and 2007, the amount of waste, which was deposited in landfills, grew by approximately 12 percent (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2013). In 2001, there were 19 million tons, while in 2007 there were 21.3 million tons (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2013).

Overall, one can speak about commercial, industrial, and municipal waste that is not recycled in any away (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2013). This trend is likely to continue in the future. It should be noted that the dependence on landfills can increase in the future due to the rapid demographic growth of the Australian society.

This argument is particularly relevant, if one speaks about large urban areas such as Sydney or Melbourne that attract people from different parts of the world. There are several challenges that are associated with the growth of landfills, for example, leachates or emissions to water, visual disamenities, or the release of greenhouse gases (BDA Group 2009, p. 4).

Moreover, one should bear in mind that approximately 30 percent of Australian landfills do not have the technologies that can enable them to capture methane and other chemicals that can produce an adverse on the environment (Lancaster 2012, p. 133). Thus, the increasing reliance on landfills can contribute to greenhouse effect (BDA Group 2009).

Furthermore, one should not forget that the decomposition of waste is a very time-consuming process (Lancaster 2012, p. 133). In some cases, the decomposition can take from 50 to 450 years (Lancaster 2012, p. 133).

This is why this trend should not be overlooked by policy-makers who must ensure the environmental sustainability of the country. In particular, they need to find some viable alternatives to landfills that cannot remain the only approach to waste management.

The benefits of waste-to-energy technologies

There are several solutions to this problem, and one of them is the recovery of energy from waste. The most widespread method of achieving this goal is the incineration of refuse. In the past, policy-makers did not favor this approach because the incineration of waste could result in the emissions of various toxic materials such as dioxins and fly ash that can pose a threat to the health of a person (Afgan & Carvalho 2002).

However, in the course of the last two decades, waste-to-energy (WtE) technologies have considerably evolved and their negative impacts have been minimized (Worrell & Vesilind 2011). For example, modern incineration facilities emit a smaller amount of CO₂ in comparison with landfills (Letcher 2008, p. 151).

This is one of issues that should be considered by public administrators. Additionally, there are other methods of deriving energy from waste. For example, one can mention pyrolysis, thermal depolymerization, or plasma arc classification (Letcher 2008, p. 151).

These processes can produce fuel-cell hydrogen, biodiesel, bioethanal, or crude oil that are necessary for the generation of energy (Letcher 2008, p. 151). These techniques can be useful for processing different types of waste. Furthermore, such processes can minimize the emission of toxic substances into air.

Thus, one should not suppose that incineration is the only technique that can be used. To a great extent, these examples suggest that technological developments can help people generate from waste. This is one of the points that can be made.

There are several examples that can illustrate the usefulness of WtE technologies. For instance, this approach minimizes the release of various greenhouse gases as carbon dioxide, methane, or nitrogen oxides (Afgan & Carvalho 2002, p. 445). These substances can be used for the generation of energy.

More importantly, this approach can be a valuable tool for decreasing the greenhouse effect which is caused by methane or carbon dioxide (Worrell & Vesilind 2011). This is the main environmental benefits of transforming refuse into a source of energy. Furthermore, these technologies can decrease the overall quantity of waste by more than 80 percent (Worrell & Vesilind 2011).

This benefit should not be overlooked by public administrators because in the future, the increasing amount of refuse can prevent the community from making an effective use of land in various urban areas of Australia which become much more populated (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2013). Furthermore, the growth of landfills can be attributed to intensifying economic activities.

Thus, one should find ways of addressing this problem in the following years. To a great extent, the adoption of WtE technologies can be important for improving the environmental sustainability of the country and overall quality of life. These are some of the main examples that can be distinguished.

Additionally, this strategy can help the national economy overcome its dependence on natural resources such as oil, natural gas, or coal that may eventually become depleted (Afgan & Carvalho 2002, p. 445). It should be kept in mind, waste can be used to generate approximately 20 percent of electric power that urban areas need (Worrell & Vesilind 2011, p. 23).

Overall, the investment in these technologies can enable the country to save the cost of generating energy and use it for other purposes such as healthcare or education. Yet, this opportunity is often lost nowadays. For example, a signification fraction of municipal waste combustible; furthermore, it can be used for the generation of energy (Worrell & Vesilind 2011, p. 23).

However, in many cases, it is not processed at all because there are not many facilities that can recover energy from this type of waste. The need to find alternative sources of energy can become even more urgent at the time when the price of fossil fuels increases.

This is why the community should consider the benefits of WtE technologies because they can make Australia more self-sufficient. This is one of the issues that should be singled out because it is important for understanding the economic aspects of waste management.

Admittedly, the recovery of energy from waste is not the only approach that policy-makers can consider. In particular, one should not forget about such a strategy as recycling which can also be viewed as a good alternative to landfills. In many cases, it can be a valid solution to environmental and economic problems.

Nevertheless, this method is not always sufficient for reducing the volume of refuse. The problem is that some materials such as polymers cannot be effectively recycled. However, they can be used for the generation of energy. Therefore, one should not disregard the use of WtE technologies since these tools can decrease the amount of waste produced by various human activities.

Conclusion

Overall, this discussion shows that by recovering energy from waste, one can derive considerable environmental and economic benefits. At present, the Australian community should find some alternative to landfills because the volume of refuse increases significantly due to demographic growth and intensifying economic activities.

The use of various WtE technologies is helpful for reducing the volume of waste that can originate from households or commercial enterprises. Secondly, this type of processing minimizes the emissions of substances that contribute to greenhouse effects. Apart from that, this approach is critical for reducing the dependence on fossil fuels that can eventually become depleted. These are the main issues that can be identified.

References

Afgan, N & Carvalho, M 2002, New and Renewable Technologies for Sustainable Development, Springer, New York.

Australian Bureau of Statistics 2013, Waste Disposed to Landfills. Web.

BDA Group 2009, The full cost of landfill disposal in Australia. Web.

Lancaster, S 2012, Green Australia, Wakefield Press, Melbourne.

Letcher, T 2008, Future Energy: Improved, Sustainable and Clean Options for our Planet, Elsevier, Boston.

Worrell, W, & Vesilind, P 2011, Solid Waste Engineering, SI Edition, Cengage Learning, New York.

Introduction

Dubai is one the Emirates that make up the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Being located in an emerging economy, Dubai has experienced a significantly high economic growth within the past two decades. The growth has partly been facilitated by Dubais emergence as the business hub of the Middle East. Government policies have also converted Dubai into a diversified economy with numerous industries and a large urban population. The expansion of the city has not been without challenges, one of the most pronounced being industrial solid waste management. Industrial solid waste is usually the byproduct of economic activities. In cities where these activities occur on a large-scale basis, industrial waste poses a real menace.

Dubai is a fast growing city with a robust industrial sector. As a result, many industrial wastes are churned out, mostly in solid form. Solid waste is also produced in small scale from households and institutions such as health facilities. Collectively, the industrial and household solid wastes are referred to as Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). In addition, plans are underway to install a major recycling plant to convert waste materials into energy (Waste-to-Energy). The aim of this paper is to examine the extent of managing the effects of solid waste within the Dubai Municipality. Further, the paper will examine the tools and approaches that have been incorporated to address the menace of MSW. After analyzing the available tools and management approaches, the research will propose recommendations, which policymakers and city planners may adopt to increase the efficiency in managing solid waste in Dubai.

Significance

I have chosen to delve into the subject of solid waste management within Dubai due to a number of factors. First, Dubai is a fast expanding city located in an emerging economy. The number of industries has increased rapidly in the last decade. Besides, the citys population is also rising. This situation has resulted in a huge amount of solid waste being released every day. As a result, modern mechanisms for managing the waste must be adopted. Solid waste disposal poses a serious hazard, which is costly for all cities in the world.

As a rapidly industrializing city, the amount of solid waste being produced in Dubai has continued to rise, nearly overwhelming the available management approaches. According to Saifaie (2013), Dubais MSW component rose from 550,350 tons in 1997 to stand at 2,689,808 tons in 2010. The volume of solid waste churned out continues to increase every year. Clearly, this upward trend of solid waste production calls for the municipality to increase its waste management capacity. Improving waste management approaches is significant since it will ensure Dubai Municipality avoids becoming overwhelmed by the high volume of waste being churned out.

Literature Review

Various researchers have explored the issue of MSW within Dubai. Even though the investigation is not exhaustive, the available body of research offers an important insight regarding the direction of Dubais policies in terms of its solid waste management (Al-Qaydi 2006). Jamil, Ahmad, and Jeon (2016) observe that Dubai plans to install the largest Waste-to-Energy (WTE) plant in the Gulf Region at a cost USD21 billion. This plant is aimed at converting Dubais solid waste to energy, which will also double up as an effort to reduce landfill waste by up to 75 percent. Dubai and the UAE at large rank among the highest per-capita producers of MSW in the world. Currently, most of this waste is eliminated through landfills, a method that diminishes the usefulness of valuable land. According to Alderman (2010), landfills pose a major economic impact when compared to WTE and recycling of waste.

Al-Hajj and Hamani (2011) observe that Dubai is one of the most prolific generators of solid waste in the world. About 7,000 tons of solid wastes are produced each day, despite mechanisms being put in place to ensure that the target of Zero Waste by 2030 is achieved (Acharya 2012). Part of this mission calls for specific measures to be put in place to eliminate the need to over-rely on landfills as the primary way of disposing of solid waste in the city. Rakhshan, Friess, and Tajerzadeh (2013) reveal how solid waste disposed in landfills affects the environment, especially where it is of hazardous nature. Hazardous solid waste may further pose health risks to the public (Rakhshan, Friess & Tajerzadeh 2013). Industries release chemicals that are generally harmful to human life and the environment. The number of industries within the Dubai Municipality continues to increase. More industries and a growing population mean that the waste produced within the municipality will continue to increase (Acharya 2012).

A sustainable waste management system will ensure that the high volume of waste churned out is contained and disposed effectively. Khatib (2011) argues that to achieve sustainable waste management, people must be actively involved in ensuring that they dispose waste properly. For instance, people can facilitate proper disposal by separating wastes in terms of their nature and level of harm. In addition, top professionals should be engaged by waste management companies to ensure proper MSW disposal. Acharya (2012) suggests recycling of solid waste as part of sustainable waste management in Dubai because it ensures minimum impact on the environment.

This method is useful in Dubai as a city without vast land resources to support numerous landfills. In addition, a growing city population has resulted in resource straining, hence the decline of natural resources (Anand 2010). Therefore, recycling waste is important in ensuring that the limited resources are managed properly. Another advantage of recycling is that it has less impact on the environment compared to producing new products from raw materials (Acharya 2012). Al Marashi and Bhinder (2008) propose the three Rs approach (Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle) for managing Dubais solid waste.

Incineration is a common method used for handling solid waste in Dubai. It involves the conversion of organic waste into residue and gasses through combustion. According to Acharya (2012), incineration is a more effective MSW management approach compared to landfills. Landfills form the highest producer of methane gas in Dubai. The gas contributes greatly to global warming. Conversely, modern incineration techniques result in minimal emission of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide. Khatib (2011) observes that due to land scarcity, landfills are becoming less popular as Dubai Municipality moves toward incineration.

Hazardous wastes from industries and healthcare facilities necessitate safer waste disposal mechanisms relative to landfills (Al-Qaydi 2006). Further, the heat generated during incineration can be used to warm domestic water, thus promoting sustainable waste management. However, incineration produces organic materials such as dioxins, PAHS, and furans, which result in dire environmental consequences (Al-Dahiri, Maraqa & Kanbour 2008). The high installation cost of incineration plants also serves as a limiting factor against adopting incineration as a method of waste management. Acharya (2012) observes that high operational costs have resulted in incineration plants being shut down in cities such as Bueno Aires and Mexico City. There is also the need to ensure that incinerators are not located where the wind could transport emissions to human settlements.

Description

Dubai Municipality adopts the regulatory and economic approaches to managing MSW within the city. The regulatory approach is mainly concerned with ensuring that the least waste is produced in the first place. The municipality understands that the best way to minimize waste in the city is through reducing its production (Acharya 2012). Various laws have been put in place to dictate the production of waste with the aim of achieving the Zero Waste by 2030. For instance, the federal Law 24 1999 emphasizes the need to take care of the environment, including water, land, and natural habitats among others.

Waste producers are required to adhere to these legislations, failure to which hefty fines can be charged. Recent legislation proposals that target waste reduction seek to operate by increasing the cost of dumping waste by companies. By increasing the fees for dumping waste, companies will be forced to adopt practices that reduce waste production with their production chain. Companies can reduce waste production by using fewer materials in their operations. Alternatively, they can opt for materials that do not result in unnecessarily high amounts of waste. Current efforts within Dubai Municipality target to reduce dumping in landfills.

Dubai Municipality is also moving toward economic management of MSW. The city hopes to make important use of the waste such as the production of the much-needed energy. Dubais energy consumption has more than doubled in the last decade, a situation that has made it difficult for the city to sustain its energy needs (Acharya 2012). Conversion of waste produced within the municipality to energy is hoped to increase energy production for Dubai. A Waste-To-Energy plant is to be installed in the city by 2020 with the capacity of producing 60 megawatts for every 2000 tons of waste.

Dubai Municipality has adopted various tools and mechanisms to manage MSW. Different efficiency levels are achieved depending on the type of mechanism used. For instance, incinerators are believed to be more efficient in managing solid waste compared to landfills. Particularly, where hazardous waste is involved, landfills are not efficient disposal tools because of their high impact on the environment. Nevertheless, incinerators also pose a challenge in the form of gaseous emissions and organics, which are produced during the process. Dubai Municipality is planning to adopt a waste management approach that embraces efficiency and sustainability. This goal will be achieved by installing the WTE plant to convert solid waste into useful energy. This section offers a detailed description of each mechanism adopted by Dubai Municipality in handling solid waste.

Landfills

The landfill is the oldest form of waste management. It is still used in many developing economies. In Dubai, landfills are used to dispose wastes that are not considered hazardous because it poses an insignificant impact on the environment and human life. Landfills are designated holes where waste is dumped and buried. Sometimes, cement may be used to bind the waste materials, hence preventing relocation to another place (Maulood & Aziz 2016). In Dubai, concerted efforts have been made to move away from the landfill method because it is believed to be a less effective way of disposing waste. Importantly, Dubai is a small emirate with limited land to construct more landfills. Already, one of Dubais landfills is full. Another one is expected to reach its full capacity within eight years (Acharya 2012). The result is that landfill is becoming a less effective means of waste disposal. Policymakers in the municipality understand that the city can no longer rely on landfills to accommodate the ever-burgeoning amount of solid waste. As a result, recent efforts have been made to replace landfill with recycling.

Recycling of Solid Waste

Recycling has numerous advantages over other methods of waste management. The obvious advantage is that it enables otherwise unwanted materials to be converted into useful substances. This approach reduces the need to create new products from scratch. As Khatib (2011) observes, less energy is used when recycling waste materials, as opposed to creating products from raw materials. The method promotes the proper use of resources, thus encouraging sustainability. Dubai has recently launched efforts to establish a WTE plant by 2020. This plant is expected to generate 60 megawatts of power from every 2000 tons of MSW (Anand 2010). This move is in line with the emirates Zero Waste by 2030 campaign aimed at ensuring all waste produced is totally disposed. Importantly, the WTE plant will eliminate the need for using landfills, which are seen to be affecting the usefulness of Dubais land. Commonly recycled substances include paper, plastic, metallic cans, and glass.

Currently, recycling in Dubai is carried out on a case-to-case basis. This lack of coordination is caused by the absence of a uniform legislation regarding recycling. Clearly, there is a need to enact laws that promote the recycling of solid waste. Saifaie (2013) suggests a compulsory framework that will require the major producers of solid waste, namely, industries, to engage in waste recycling. In April 2016, the waste management department of Dubai Municipality proposed charges to be imposed on companies that dump waste in landfills. If approved, this legislation is expected to discourage companies from dumping and instead adopt recycling. A separate initiative dubbed Dubai Environmental Culture was launched in 2015 to encourage residents to adopt recycling at the individual level.

Incineration

Incineration is an old method of MSW management. The high-temperature process converts solid organic waste into inorganic substances through combustion. In Dubai, incineration is used to treat colossal amounts of solid waste (Alderman 2010). Currently, the city operates one of the best incinerators in the world. As a result, the Dubai Municipality treats nearly 20 tons of solid waste (mostly healthcare waste) through incineration every day. Incineration is suitable for waste that cannot be recycled or conveniently dumped in a landfill.

Analysis

SWOT Analysis

Dubai has become the business hub of the Middle East region with numerous industries and burgeoning population. Despite its huge population and numerous industries, Dubais size is a mere 3885km². The small size may serve to compound the effect that solid waste has on the citys growth. Dubai Municipality is struggling with the issue of MSW. This trend is common in most developing economies where a mismatch is witnessed between the rate at which industries are expanding and waste management efforts. For instance, in Dubai, the old method of landfills is still the most used in managing solid waste. Currently, Dubai municipality operates landfills in five different locations, namely, Al- Ghusais, Al-Warqqa, Al-Awir, Hatta, and, Jebel landfills. These landfills are expected to reach capacity within the next decade. This situation will pose a major challenge concerning how to dispose solid waste in the future.

The various tools and mechanisms for managing MSW may be further analyzed based on the SWOT approach. To begin with, several strengths can be identified with respect to each approach. The WTE plant will provide renewable energy for Dubai city, hence reducing the consumption other energy forms that result in air pollution. In addition, the WTE plant is expected to have minimal emissions as a departure from the current waste management tools that have often caused a lot of emission or pollution of the land around them (in the case of landfills). The recently installed medical waste incinerator also provides key benefits for the city. With a capacity of 20 tons per day, this incinerator has minimized the medical waste that often accumulated in the municipalitys landfills.

Various weaknesses can be identified regarding the methods discussed above. With respect to the WTE and the medical waste incinerator, the issue of huge costs poses a major drawback. High costs of managing these plants may result in financial challenges. The WTE plant will require $44 million to install alone, not to mention the cost of operating it on a day-to-day basis (Jamil et al. 2016). The incinerator is also costly to manage. According to Jamil et al. (2016), many modern incinerators have been closed due to the inability to meet their operational costs. Landfills pose the key threat of contaminating the surrounding land. Additionally, Dubai is small, meaning that the landfills already occupy too much land that could be directed to more important uses such as modern farming. Another weakness with respect to the WTE recycling plant is that its usefulness is limited to recyclable materials (glass, paper, metal, and plastic). Hence, unrecyclable materials such as residue from construction will continue being dumped in the landfills.

Opportunities for the management approaches include the ability to increase the amount of waste disposed. For instance, the recently installed incinerator treats about 20 tons of solid medical waste per day. The increasing the capacity of waste treated daily will significantly reduce the need to rely primarily on landfills. The proposed WTE plant will reduce the usefulness of landfills in Dubai by up to 75 percent. Finally, threats against the current waste management tools and approaches include the culture of producing excessive waste. As Hajj and Hamani (2011) observe, Dubais inhabitants have a culture of producing excessive waste. Despite the concerted efforts to reduce the amount of waste produced per person each day, the amount remains high (2.4 kg per person). Companies also produce large amounts of waste. If this culture of excessive waste production is not curbed, it may overwhelm the current waste management processes in the city.

Results and Conclusion

Dubai employs three major approaches to solid waste management. The approaches include landfills, recycling, and incineration. The landfill method is the oldest form of waste management in Dubai. Currently, Dubai Municipality operates five landfills. However, Al-Ghusa is nearly full. Issues such as the eminent filling up of the landfills coupled with the risks that dumping poses to the environment are prompting policymakers in the municipality to move toward recycling. Recycling as an MSW management approach is favored because it brings about several advantages. Recycling prevents the landfills from becoming filled up too soon. In addition, recycling renders useful products that would have otherwise been unwanted. Importantly, the cost of recycling waste into new products is much lower compared to converting these substances from raw materials. Therefore, recycling waste promotes sustainable use of natural resources.

Incineration is used to dispose MSW that cannot be recycled. The method is an efficient mechanism for disposing of hazardous waste that would otherwise be harmful to the environment if dumped in a landfill. Modern incinerators are highly efficient but costly to install. For this reason, it is important for the municipality to perform a cost-benefit analysis to determine the type of incinerators to install. The advantage of modern incinerators is that they result in minimal emissions. In addition, modern incinerators allow the heat produced during incineration to be used in the production of thermal power. Therefore, recycling and modern incineration are critical in ensuring the Zero Waste by 2030 campaign comes to fruition. Dubais current WTE plan is geared toward converting all waste into useful energy.

Recommendations

This section offers a discussion on ways of improving solid waste management within the Dubai Municipality. Special emphasis is placed on sustainability. Currently, plans are underway to ensure efficient conversion of Dubais waste into energy (WTE). To achieve this goal, the municipality will need to involve stakeholders from the private sector, as well as members of the public. Currently, in Dubai, it is estimated that every person produces about 2.4 kilograms of solid waste (Khatib 2011). Therefore, achieving meaningful progress in waste management will require the involvement of the public through sensitization. For instance, educating the public on the need to separate waste at the household can boost recycling efforts. This plan will prevent recyclable materials from ending up in the landfills.

The municipality should enact stringent laws that will deter companies from dumping solid waste in landfills. The laws may establish high charges per every ton of solid waste that a company dumps in the landfills. This move will ensure that companies adopt recycling efforts to avoid being fined. Additionally, a legislation framework that requires compulsory recycling by companies should be put in place. This strategy will serve to increase the volume of waste that is recycled, hence reducing the need to dump in landfills. Under this legislation, heavy fines should be imposed on companies that deliberately prefer dumping to recycling. Partial emptying of the landfills can be achieved through converting the existing landfills into recycling plants. This way, recyclable materials that have been dumped in the landfill can be sorted and recycled. In addition to emptying the landfills, this exercise will lead to the production of useful materials, as well as thermal power.

Finally, further research should be carried out regarding the best approaches to managing MSW within the available financial framework. Importantly, a thorough cost-benefit analysis should be carried out to ensure that the methods adopted are not only effective but also affordable. In addition, the effectiveness of the already-implemented measures should be investigated to identify gaps and hence the possible areas of improvement.

Reference List

Acharya, P 2012, Domestic solid waste recycling: Programs and policies for Dubai. Web.

Al Marashi, H & Bhinder, J 2008, From the tallest to the greenest-paradigm shift in Dubai. Web.

Al-Dahiri, M, Maraqa, M & Kanbour, F 2008, Medical waste management in the UAE, Kuwait Waste Management Conference, Kuwait City.

Alderman, L 2010, Dubai faces environmental problems after growth, The New York Times, p. 4.

Al-Hajj, A & Hamani, K 2011, Material waste in the UAE construction industry: Main causes and minimization practices, Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol. 7, no. 4, pp.221-235.

Al-Qaydi, S 2006, Industrial solid waste disposal in Dubai, UAE: A study in Economic geography, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Anand, S 2010, Solid waste management, Mittal Publications, New Delhi.

Jamil, M, Ahmad, F & Jeon, Y 2016, Renewable energy technologies adopted by the UAE: Prospects and challengesA comprehensive overview, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 55, no. 1, pp.1181-1194.

Khatib, I 2011, Municipal solid waste management in developing countries: Future challenges and possible opportunities, INTECH Open Access Publisher, Rijeka.

Maulood, Y & Aziz, S 2016, Soil and municipal solid waste leachate characterization at Erbil anaerobic landfill site, ZANCO Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences, vol. 28, no. 3, pp.104-133.

Rakhshan, K, Friess, W & Tajerzadeh, S 2013, Evaluating the sustainability impact of improved building insulation: A case study in the Dubai residential built environment, Building and Environment, vol. 67, no. 1, pp.105-110.

Saifaie, A 2013, Waste Management in Dubai, Envirocitiese Magazine, vol. 4, no. 1, pp.4-7.

Executive Summary

The project focuses on the investigation of zero waste management as a viable option of saving the planet from pollution and increasing environmental sustainability efforts. The introduction gets the audience acquainted with the general idea of the paper and the key concept investigated. A relevant model supporting the rationale is the 3R approach. The methodology section briefly presents the methods utilized in research and the questions to be answered. In the research ethics part, the main principles of ethical research are outlined, with the specification on the current projects goals and requirements. The review of literature is the most extensive part since it analyses scholars investigations of the research problem. Several sections are singled out in the review, united by general topics on which previous studies have focused. Findings from the literature point out the main points singled out in research articles. The SWOT analysis includes an overview of the major strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of zero waste management. In the recommendation section, suggestions on promoting zero waste are given. The conclusion reiterates the main points made in the project.

Introduction

Sustainability has been the main common goal for all humanity in the past decades, and it still remains a highly crucial issue. Whereas all aspects of sustainable development are highly important, finding solutions to environmental problems is more crucial than economic or social ones. One of the most viable approaches to overcome the problems of unfriendly treatment of the biosphere is zero waste management. This concept was introduced in the 1970s with the meaning of recovering resources (Song, Li and Zeng, 2015, p. 200). The major purpose of the zero-waste approach is the arrangement of a circular flow of materials, thereby reducing waste to the minimum.

A Relevant Model to Underpin the Rationale

The most relevant model of zero waste management is the so-called 3R model: reduce, reuse, recycle. The model comprises such aspects as development, production, construction, use, and disposal (Singh, Ramakrishna and Gupta, 2017). Zero waste, which incorporates two main aspects, is the major goal of the 3R model. The factors most closely related to zero waste are the recycling of waste and sustainable manufacturing (Singh, Ramakrishna and Gupta, 2017). Recycling may include e-waste (electric and electronic), ceramics, machine scrap, and other types of waste. Meanwhile, sustainable manufacturing involves the most recent trends in the machine industry, foundry, and operating.

Methodology and Research Questions

The methods to be utilised in research are ethnography and a review of literature. These qualitative approaches allow collecting a sufficient amount of data on the selected topic, sorting it out, and making viable conclusions about the subject of investigation. Ethnographic material will be taken from scholarly articles and reviews. The current study aims at answering the following research questions:

1. What is the potential of the zero-waste policy in reducing waste?
2. What benefits and limitations are there for the implementation of zero waste?

Research Ethics

Although the study does not involve any experiments on living beings or data collection from specific participants, it is crucial to adhere to the rules of research ethics. In case of the present study, the ethical principles to be followed include the authenticity of materials used and paying tribute to the authors whose scholarly works are being consulted. To pursue the first aim, only peer-reviewed articles will be utilised as sources. To follow the second goal, each thought or idea borrowed from the literature will be properly cited.

Literature Review

Many recent research studies are dedicated to the problem of zero waste management and the ways of its implementation. The articles by Pietzsch, Ribeiro, and de Medeiros (2017), Song, Li, and Zeng (2015), and Zaman (2015) focus on zero waste management, its benefits, challenges, and strategies. Pietzsch, Ribeiro, and de Medeiros (2017) note that a consensus on the concept of zero waste has not been gained yet. Still, the scholars have singled out four dimensions of benefits brought by zero waste to society: community, financial-economic, environmental, and industrial. The main challenges have been found in the micro (stakeholders), meso (municipalities and industries), and macro environment (politics and culture) (Pietzsch, Ribeiro and de Medeiros, 2017). Song, Li, and Zeng (2015) also acknowledge the presence of barriers on the way to zero waste, such as the lack of efforts taken in the spheres of e-waste, packaging, and food waste. Researchers also note the inequality in waste management opportunities in developed and developing countries. Therefore, it is crucial to consider the variability of challenges related to zero waste implementation in each particular state.

Zaman (2015) emphasises the significance of zero waste in the confrontation of waste problems prevailing in the world. The scholar notes that the main reason why zero waste has gained popularity with policymakers is that this concept helps to promote a variety of beneficial processes. Among them, there are the sustainability of production and consumption, considerate recycling, and recovery of resources. Still, while Zaman (2015) mentions that zero waste is a positive idea, the scholar also argues that the design and evaluation of this important concept have not received sufficient attention yet.

Another direction prevailing in scholarly articles is represented by specific ways of reducing waste in different industries. Arevalo-Gallegos et al.s (2017) study analyses the opportunity of creating value-added products with the help of lignocellulose, an innovative sustainable material. Baghbanzadeh et al. (2017) research zero waste as a solution for the freshwater shortage. Principato, Pratesi, and Secondi (2018) explore the advantages of zero waste introduction in the restaurant sphere, whereas Sharma et al. (2017) discuss the feasibility of zero waste for paper and plastic wastes. Scholars note that zero waste management will become possible due to the increased use of sustainable materials, which are characterised by renewability, natural abundance, and easiness of accessibility and recyclability (Arevalo-Gallegos et al., 2017). Baghbanzadeh et al. (2017) have found that the process of water distillation is more energy-efficient if performed with the use of the zero-waste approach. Meanwhile, Sharma et al. (2017) remark that zero waste goals cannot be gained without total recycling of plastic and paper waste. Hence, scholars acknowledge the significance of the zero-waste policy but note that it is impossible to achieve without altering the current ways of managing waste and using resources.

Finally, several scholarly studies are concentrated on various functions of materials that can be utilised in order to increase zero-waste efforts. Burlakovs et al. (2018) emphasise the need to reduce waste disposal and recover materials and metals as a necessary prerequisite of the successful movement to zero waste. De Bhowmick, Sarmah, and Sen (2019) analyse the opportunities in the biodiesel sphere presented by oleaginous microalgae biodiesel. Researchers note that the current level of biodiesels development and usage is not sufficient to replace unsustainable petroleum and diesel materials. Hottle et al. (2015) also discuss the need to make the zero-waste movement more progressive. Scholars remark that recycling and composting may be considered as viable options for the organisation of sustainable venue-based events. According to Hottle et al. (2015), due to the tradition of consuming food and drinks during sports venues, people contribute to waste generation. Such a tradition, as researchers argue, can be turned to a positive direction via promoting composting and recycling. Finally, Singh, Ramakrishna, and Gupta (2017) emphasise the potential of zero waste to serve as a roadmap for the future of manufacturing (p. 1230).

Findings

Based on the review of literature, it is possible to single out several major findings. First of all, the zero-waste management model is a highly valid approach to reducing the amount of waste produced by people all over the world. The benefits of zero waste are numerous, including the reduction of dangerous pollution, the decrease in waste and material disposal, and the increase in reusability of things.

At the same time, it has been found that the movement toward zero waste is not void of some barriers. For instance, there is currently no holistic strategy for zero-waste programs (Zaman, 2015). Additionally, there is a striking difference in opportunities to implement zero-waste strategies between developed and developing countries (Song, Li and Zeng, 2015). Statistics indicate that more than 90% of waste in low-income countries is dumped or burned, there being no possibility of recycling it (Solid waste management, 2019). At the same time, the status of a developed nation does not guarantee that the citizens are conscious of their environmental footprint. For instance, every U.S. citizen generates approximately 808 kilograms of waste annually (Global waste index 2019, n.d.). Still, the main problem is not the amount of waste but the solutions that states utilise to manage it.

SWOT Analysis

Strengths

• the elimination of the amount of waste generated by humanity
• the creation of new jobs
• the reduction of the environmental footprint
• the valorisation of household and industrial waste
• the increased quality of life due to a smaller degree of pollution
• close collaboration among people in communities
• the availability of high-quality materials that are obtained via recycling and reusing

Weaknesses

• unequal possibilities of waste collection and recycling in developed and developing countries
• many people do not know how to sort waste with the purpose of its further reusing and recycling
• in low-income countries, there is poor or no financial support of zero-waste projects
• additional expenses are needed for the arrangement of waste collection and recycling activities
• recycling plants have to be built in many places due to a current lack of them
• not all citizens are ready to pay additional effort to sort their waste and utilise it properly

Opportunities

• a major contribution to peoples lives at all levels: local, regional, and national
• a decreased need for purchasing and transporting materials for local industries since they will now be available on the site
• communities will enhance their environmental profile and attract visitors or even new residents
• people in the community will become friendlier and more environmentally-concerned
• children will grow in waste-free environments and will realise the significance of the 3R model since a very early age
• communities will earn money from selling materials; the money will be spent on the improvement of recreational places or donated to developing countries so that they could activate their zero-waste efforts

Threats

• a negative reaction from the citizens who consider it not their business
• individuals employed in the waste management system can oppose innovation as a threat to their jobs
• at the initial stages of the project, financial losses will be unavoidable (informing the population, purchasing containers for sorting waste, buying materials for people participating in collecting and sorting waste from dumping places)

Recommendations

To promote the implementation of zero waste management, it is necessary to manage the limitations existing currently. Firstly, developing countries require help both with education and introduction of waste collecting, sorting, and recycling activities. Next, developed countries should be taught about the significance of smart consumption. Further, much effort should be paid to the encouragement of communities participation in waste elimination activities. It is crucial to utilise the identified opportunities and reduce threats and weaknesses associated with zero waste management. The potential of the zero-waste policy in reducing waste is rather high. Therefore, it is essential to make every person living in the world realise his or her responsibility for the planets future.

Conclusion

Zero waste management is a highly viable approach to minimising the amount of waste generated by people. By encouraging citizens to participate in zero-waste initiatives, governments will promote the elimination of waste, which will lead to lower pollution levels. Sustainability of production and consumption, which can be gained through zero waste, is likely to promote a healthier future of the world. Despite current inequalities in access to zero-waste activities, all countries should strive for participation in this important process.

Reference List

1. Arevalo-Gallegos, A. et al. (2017) Lignocellulose: a sustainable material to produce value-added products with a zero waste approacha review, International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 99, pp. 308318.
2. Baghbanzadeh, M. et al. (2017) Zero thermal input membrane distillation, a zero-waste and sustainable solution for freshwater shortage, Applied Energy, 187, pp. 910928.
3. Burlakovs, J. et al. (2018) On the way to zero waste management: recovery potential of elements, including rare earth elements, from fine fraction of waste, Journal of Cleaner Production, 186, pp. 8190.
4. De Bhowmick, G., Sarmah, A. K. and Sen, R. (2019) Zero-waste algal biorefinery for bioenergy and biochar: a green leap towards achieving energy and environmental sustainability, Science of the Total Environment, 650, pp. 24672482.
5. Global waste index 2019 (n.d.) Web.
6. Hottle, T. A. et al. (2015) Toward zero waste: composting and recycling for sustainable venue based events, Waste Management, 38, pp. 8694.
7. Pietzsch, N., Ribeiro, J. L. D. and de Medeiros, J. F. (2017) Benefits, challenges and critical factors of success for zero waste: a systematic literature review, Waste Management, 67, pp. 324353.
8. Principato, L., Pratesi, C. A. and Secondi, L. (2018) Towards zero waste: an exploratory study on restaurant managers, International Journal of Hospitality Management, 74, pp. 130137.
9. Sharma, D. K. et al. (2017) Technical feasibility of zero waste for paper and plastic wastes, Waste and Biomass Valorization.
10. Singh, S., Ramakrishna, S. and Gupta, M. K. (2017) Towards zero waste manufacturing: a multidisciplinary review, Journal of Cleaner Production, 168, pp. 12301243.
11. Solid waste management(2019) Web.
12. Song, Q., Li, J. and Zeng, X. (2015) Minimizing the increasing solid waste through zero waste strategy, Journal of Cleaner Production, 104, pp. 199210.
13. Zaman, A. U. (2015) A comprehensive review of the development of zero waste management: lessons learned and guidelines, Journal of Cleaner Production, 91, pp. 1225.

Executive Summary

Waste materials from the domestic and commercial sector pose various challenges to the environment. They also inflate domestic and organisational budgets. This paper discusses the challenges of waste management with reference to Rye Waste Management Facility. The facility is located is situated in Australia within Mornington Peninsula, Shire municipality.

The facility receives MSW from both domestic and commercial sectors. It has systems of waste management involving recycling and composting green wastes. Above 50% of wastes received at Rye facility comprises green wastes from commercial and domestic sources.

Therefore, two cost saving opportunities are recommended. The first opportunity involves a reduction of pre-consumption green wastes while the second is a reduction of post-consumption wastes including biodegradable and non-biodegradable wastes.

Introduction

Increasing urban population causes an alarming increase in waste material production. World Bank (2013) confirms the severity of solid wastes in urban areas by claiming that urban centres had about 2.9 billion people ten years ago, with each person producing an average of 0.64 kg of MSW (municipal solid waste) per day. This figure amounts to about 0.68 billion tonnes of MSW annually.

With the onset of the high increase in the consumption of mass-produced manufactured products, the urban population has not only increased currently. Waste production per individual urban resident has also increased. World Bank (2013) reveals that the population of urban centre residents is about 3 billion, with each person producing about 1.2 kg of waste materials on a daily basis.

Upon projecting these statistics in 10 years to come, by 2025, the world urban population will have grown to about 4.3 billion with a corresponding increase of wastes production of up to 1.42 kg per individual on a daily basis. This situation will amount to close to 2.2 billion tonnes of MSW annually.

To mitigate this challenge, urban centres need to reduce this amount of waste production while incorporating appropriate strategies for effective waste management within their waste management facilities. This paper discusses how this goal can be achieved with reference to Rye waste management facility in Australia.

Background Information

Rye is one of the Mornington Peninsula Shire municipality landfills. Landfills are used for waste management purposes such as temporary storage, consolidation and transfer, or processing of waste materials (Diaz, Chiumenti, Savage & Eggerth 2003, p.52).

For instance, Rye receives different kinds of wastes. When sorted out, green waste is transferred to the unit for composting and production of methane gas, which is burnt to produce heat energy. This energy produces electrical energy, which serves 1500 homes.

After composting, mulch is produced and later sold within the municipality. At Rye facility also has a waste transfer station, namely Truemans Road Transfer Station.

The main aim of Rye facility is to foster waste recovery together with the provision of tipping services to people within the municipality. It provides people, especially Kerbside residents, with easy, cost effective, and quick means of disposing their domestic and commercial wastes.

Demographic Data

Rye landfill accepts putrescible and landfill wastes. It also receives domestic together with commercial wastes from Kerbside. Putrescible wastes refer to solid wastes that contain organic matter that is capable of being decomposed by microorganisms and of such a character and proportion as to cause obnoxious odours (Price 2001, p.334).

Various cells for the Rye wastes disposal facility are already filled with substantive amount of waste products. This situation has prompted the establishment of the final cell with an approximated life span of 7 years if waste disposal rates do not increase from the current rates.

The cell has an airspace of 800, 000 M³ (Mornington Peninsula Shire 2009). Both Rye and Tyabb process about 151, 200 M³ of green wastes per year (Mornington Peninsula Shire 2009).

Mornington Peninsula Shire municipality receives various types of wastes. The wastes fall into three categories. The first category comprises MSW while the second category consists of organics. The third category consists of recovered materials. 54-percent (81,274 tonnes) of all the wastes received by the municipality predominantly comprises the MSW (Mornington Peninsula Shire 2009).

Moreover, 26-percent (37,800) of the waste materials contain green wastes while the recovered material constitutes 18-percent or 28, 222 tonnes (Mornington Peninsula Shire 2009). 61-percent (49,738 tonnes) of the total MSW received by the municipality finds its way to Rye landfill.

These waste contents comprise inert wastes together with putrescible wastes. 51-percent (25,544 tonnes) of all MSW disposed at Rye originates from Kerbside services for collecting MSW. 44-percent (21,852 tonnes) emanates from the commercial sector while the remaining 5-percent originates from Hooper tipping facilities and transfer stations.

Current Waste Management Practices

The current waste management systems at the Rye facility focus on waste reuse to minimise its implication to the environment. For instance, industrial and domestic green waste is taken through composting systems. When the green waste decays, methane gas production occurs (Bogner & Matthews 2003).

Methane generates electricity. The residual that remains forms mulch that is used in firms across the Mornington Peninsula Shire municipality. The picture shown in fig.1 below shows methane gas generator at Rye wastes facility.

The current waste management system helps in the mitigation of environmental costs that are associated with wastes. Wastes have a share of 3% of the total emissions in Australia (Mornington Peninsula Shire 2009). 80-percent of these emissions are accounted for by MSW.

Emissions emanating from landfills are accounted mainly by uncontrolled production of methane gas as a by-product of green waste decomposition. Exposure of green materials to air leads to their breakdown by anaerobic bacteria together with other organisms to form waste and carbon II oxide (Galle, Samuelsson & Borjesson 2001). These two products contribute to the natural greenhouse effect (Hiramatsu et al. 2003).

When green wastes compile together in a landfill, absence of air causes breakdown of the material into methane, carbon II oxide, mulch, and water with the help of anaerobic bacteria. In landfills, Carbon II oxide and methane come out in approximately equal magnitudes (Bogner & Matthews 2003; Burnley 2001).

Further decomposition of methane to produce water and carbon II oxide takes place at the Rye facility by burning it to produce energy for electricity production. If not burnt, its release to the atmosphere produces 24 times effect in causing global warming in comparison with carbon II oxide (Bramryd 1997).

The goal of the current Rye green waste management systems is to ensure zero release of methane into the atmosphere. Additional cost saving is possible through the minimisation of power consumption from the national grid supply. The entire current waste management systems at Rye is shown below

Rationale for Wastes Assessment

Management for wastes encompasses one of the core mandates of all municipalities in Australia. Assessment of wastes provides an important beginning point for the establishment of effective waste management strategies. Although there is a legislative requirement for people to tip off their wastes in an environmentally responsible manner in Australia, proper waste disposal is an ethical responsibility of every Australian citizen.

Assessment of wastes is also important in the development of strategies for protection of the environment together with saving the cost-associated wastes such as waste collection and pollution of natural resources such as rivers. Some strategies that can be developed for reducing wastes can also lead to saving monetary resources for both commercial sector and households.

For instance, a reduction of pre-consumption wastes in households can help in lowering the households budgets. Where recycling is an alternative waste management technique, the use of virgin materials in the manufacture of commodities that are produced by 100-percent recycled material is cut tremendously. This helps in the conservation of natural resources that are used as raw materials in industries.

In this effect, in the US, restaurants lose $30 billion to $40 billion every week via food wastes, albeit environmental cost that is associated with the wastes. Replica of such a situation in Australia needs to be avoided by assessing the wastes followed by the development of an appropriate strategy to reduce, recycle, where appropriate, and/or dispose non-recyclable wastes in an environmentally responsible manner.

Methodology

Developing an effective waste management strategy initiates by providing a response to the interrogative of why green wastes qualify as the largest portion of the total wastes received by Rye facility. Responding to this question requires conducting of interviews with the management of commercial institutions, especially the restaurant and households within Mornington Peninsula Shire municipality.

Wastes are delivered to Rye facility while being contained in bins. Analysis of the contents of these bins forms an important source of data that is employable in the determination of appropriate strategies for management of the wastes in a more effective manner.

Description of Waste-generating Processes

Green wastes are produced either in the form of post-consumption remains or in the form of pre-consumption wastes. Post-consumption green wastes involve trims of inedible parts of green products. They also include food leftovers. Biodegradable post-consumption wastes also involve wastes produced by timber millers and the remainder of cutouts such as papers and plywood among others. Households and commercial institutions such as restaurants essentially produce post-consumer food waste.

Pre-consumer food wastes are also an important process of waste production. The processes for production of these wastes encompass spoiled foods, expiration, and over production. Waste is also produced through activities that are associated with handling of products.

These activities include transportation, storage, and processing of products. Wastes associated with these activities include plastic and aluminium packaging containers. This waste is collected by bins before being transferred to Rye waste management facility.

Currently, there exists no mechanism of measuring the amount of wastes produced by commercial food-retailing organisations or households in Australia. This suggests that estimation of costs that are associated with waste production processes at the household or organisational level is statistically challenging.

Lack of such mechanism also provides challenges of waste production monitoring and control in the bid to reduce the costs associated with wastes both directly in terms of increased expenditure of food items and indirectly in the form of environmental pollution and deterioration of climate through global warming.

Results from Waste Assessment

Interview held with 10 senior chefs from different restaurants revealed important information on the ways through which wastes are generated. However, these chefs were not authorised to speak on behalf of their respective organisations. Consequently, their details and/or the details of the organisations remain anonymous.

Seven chefs claimed that they encountered challenges in terms of forecasting accurate number of meals required to satisfy customer demands on a daily basis, thus leading to over procurement of perishable green food items. This declaration reveals the high proportion of green wastes (food) at Rye waste management facility as shown in fig. 3.

Two of the chefs agreed that over-procurement was important in ensuring that they did not fail to fulfil excessive orders in a day when such a need arose. They claimed that this strategy reduced the cost of urgent replenishment.

The remaining three chefs claimed that their main challenge that led to wastage of foods in their restaurants was due to complication of menus to the extent that forecasting of exact raw materials was problematic. Their facilities also changed their menus often to include local together with sustainable foods. The changes involved incorporation of incredibly highly perishable food.

Upon posing the question of why one would consider disposing foods into a bin, 98 % respondents in a sample of 100 Kerbside residents cited spoilage. The remaining people (2%) believed that they could throw food not necessary because it was spoilt, but because they brought fresher foods, especially vegetables.

An analysis of 25 bins, with 5 of them being from restaurants while 20 were from households, revealed high contents of green wastes followed by polythene bags, plastics, and very few aluminium cans. Table 1 below shows these results.

Table 1: Components of Domestic Wastes.

Analysis of the Results

Upon considering the types of wastes found in the studied restaurants and household bins, any effort to reduce waste disposal at Rye facility initiates by a reduction of the wastes produced by domestic and commercial sector. One of the opportunities is the reduction of the amount of packaging foods and beverages that are sold at the restaurants using containers that cannot be re-used to re-package the same items.

For instance, customers can be encouraged to come with their travel mugs to the restaurants if they want take away beverages. Special discounts can be provided for compliant customers to lure the rest to follow similar steps.

This opportunity can reduce the amount of air pollution through the release of carbon II oxide and other by-products that are emitted by vehicles through the removal of about 10 trucks that are transporting packaging materials each day to restaurants and raw materials to industries that manufacture the containers form roads.

Introduction of a means of monitoring production of green wastes in restaurants acts as an important cost saving opportunity that is capable of reducing waste releasing rates at Rye facility. This requires the deployment of waste measuring scales together with installation of software running on a computer system to monitor waste production rates with time. The picture shown in fig. 4 below shows an example of such a system in use.

The system can record the quantity of wasted food, its sources, and reason for wastage. With this data, it becomes possible to prevent any wastage of foods. The success rate of these systems is high. For instance, Intel Corporation installed the system at its eating facilities in Oregon in 2009.

By 2010, the corporation was able to save $132,000 for every $1,000,000 spent on the purchase of green food supplies (Intel Corporation 2010). This strategy only deals with pre-consumption wastes at the restaurants. While this system may not be commercially viable for households, it can truck food wastages manually, thus helping people to take proactive measure to cut the wastage.

Recommendations for Wastes Minimisation

Both cost-saving opportunities discussed above are recommended for implementation by restaurant and households in Kerbside. They can both reduce the rate of waste disposal at Rye waste management facility. Solution 1 requires the introduction of programmes for enhancing customer awareness on environmental responsibility and building strong culture of social corporate responsibility in an organisation.

Developing this culture will take time, for instance 3 years. There are no costs associated with this solution. For instance, offering a discount of 11 percent to customers who come with their own packaging increases profitability of a restaurant.

The cost of a packaging container is about 12 percent of the cost of production. Solution 2 is effective and implementable in a short time, say less than 1 year. However, it requires spending of $ 1,205 for each complete waste management system installed at the restaurants. No associated costs are encountered by manual version of the system that is utilised in households.

References

Bogner, J & Matthews, E 2003, Global methane emissions from landfills: New methodology and annual estimates 1980-1996, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, vol. 17 no. 11, pp. 34-48.

Bramryd, T 1997, Land filling in the perspective of the global CO₂ balance, Proceedings of the Sardinia 97, International Landfill Symposium, Sardinia, University of Cagliari.

Burnley, S 2001, The impact of the European landfill directive on waste management in the United Kingdom, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, vol. 3 no. 2, pp. 349-358.

Diaz, F, Chiumenti, G, Savage, N & Eggerth, L 2006, Managing the organic fraction of municipal solid waste, Biocycle, vol. 47 no. 5, pp. 50-53.

Galle, B, Samuelsson, B & Borjesson, G 2001, Measurements of methane emissions from landfills using a time correlation tracer method based on FTIR absorption spectroscopy, Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 35 no. 1, pp. 21-25.

Hiramatsu, A, Hanaki, K & Aramaki, T 2003, Baseline options and greenhouse gas emission reduction of clean development mechanism project in urban solid waste management, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, vol. 8 no. 3, pp. 293-310.

Intel Corporation 2010, Food Wastes Prevention, Oregon, Intel Corporation.

Mornington Peninsula Shire 2009, Municipal Wastes Management Strategy, Victoria, Mornington Peninsula Shire municipality.

Price, J 2001, The landfill directive and the challenge ahead: demands and pressures on the UK householder, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, vol. 32 no.13, pp. 333-348.

World Bank 2013, Global Review of Solid Waste Management. Web.

Introduction

Solid waste management has significantly gained attention in the present century. With the impacts of globalization, there is a persistent need for transformative mechanisms of solid waste management. Evidently, most nations continue to experience challenges in solid waste management. Particularly, the developing nations are the highly affected (Singh & Ramanathan, 2010).

Apart from the available waste management technologies, municipalities face various dilemmas. Specifically, this regards the choosing of either private or public system of solid waste management. Based on an article describing solid waste management in Canada, this paper focuses on this topic. The paper researches and examines the issue of privatization in solid waste management in Canada.

Argument on Privatization of Solid Waste Management

The article reveals crucial debates on the issue of privatization of solid waste management. Observably, there are present potential arguments on the issue of solid waste management. Generally, the debates are based on public and private management of solid waste (Kumar, 2009). Personally, I encourage the adoption and practice of privatization in solid waste management.

This decision is informed by the several advantages of a privatized system of solid waste management. As indicated in the article, privatization of the process leads to the realization of high levels of efficiency. Municipalities are able to integrate of enforce quality management systems due to this approach. Indicatively, the relevant municipality can adopt various transformative measures such as performance contracting.

Such initiative would enhance the capacity of private partners to manage and dispose all solid wastes according to the appropriate provisions. A privatized system of solid waste management enables full compliance by the organizations to various regulatory frameworks. Apart from this, the system allows an easier and flexible manner of conducting compliance monitoring initiatives (McDavid, 1985).

Various municipalities around the globe have failed to manage the solid waste in a proper manner. Therefore, privatization enables such municipalities to act as oversight authorities in the disposal and management of these wastes. The approach also minimizes the public expenditures on solid waste management. Thus, more municipal resources are saved and may be utilized in other development projects.

Privatization and Improvement of Service Quality

Privatization has a significant impact on service quality. The article clearly presents the outcomes on the service quality recorded from a privatized solid waste management system in Canada. It is simple to regulate and contract private firms (Uriarte, 2008). This process is attainable through provision of realistic and competitive service targets.

These targets must be provided or issued to all private firms involved in the management of solid waste. Through engagement of private partners, the solid waste management process becomes more compliant and simple. The municipality only has to provide competitive measures during bidding and p tendering processes.

The existence of several players within the private sector increases the rate of competition. Consequently, this situation also leads to the development of high standards for service delivery. The municipalities are more inclined to offering tenders in consideration of the capacity of individual firms to provide excellent and high quality service. However, it is imperative to note that privatization of solid waste management do not lead to a reduction of cost (Kumar, 2009).

Specifically, this is notable in the various private entities that are involved in waste management. They incur great expenses due to high competition and demand for strategic and more transformative solid waste management programs. The individual solid waste generators also have to pay expensively for the services of private firms.

The Community and Management of Solid Waste

There are several factors considered by a community in the adoption of a privatized or public system of solid waste management. Poor road networks make the public to advocate for privatization of the solid waste management (Anand, 2010). However, this decision is likely to be revoked whenever the collection costs for solid wastes increases.

Therefore, high collection costs charged by the private waste handlers make the community to shift to public waste management strategies. Increased compactness of solid waste increases the likelihood of the community to seek for a privatized system of waste management. Highly compacted solid waste might be difficult to transport, dispose or manage at household or community levels.

Effective transportation is a crucial component of solid waste management. However, most solid wastes might be difficult to transport. This depends on several factors including the nature of waste, availability of adequate and improved road network and other required equipment.

Regional proximity determines whether the community would opt for a privatized or public solid waste management practices. Facilities located far away from the residence areas of the community might increase the chances for a privatized waste management strategy (Uriarte, 2008). It is evident that the community plays a fundamental role in the determination and dictation of market options in solid waste management.

Some of their practices do not promote competitive bidding markets. Most private organizations involved in the management of solid waste are confronted by serious challenges. Analytically, these challenges emerge from the community factors.

References

Anand, S. (2010). Solid waste management. New Delhi: Mittal Publications.

Singh, J. & Ramanathan, A. L. (2010). Solid waste management: Present and future challenges. New Delhi: I.K. International Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.

Kumar, S. (2009). Solid waste management. New Delhi: Northern Book Centre.

McDavid, J. (1985). The Canadian Experience with Privatizing Residential Solid Waste Collection Services. Public administration review, 602-608.

Uriarte, F. A. (2008). Solid waste management: Principles and practices : an introduction to the basic functional elements of solid waste management, with special emphasis on the needs of developing countries. Diliman, Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press.

Abstract

The discovery of the potential of radionuclides in the management of medical conditions has seen an increase in the use of radionuclides in medical facilities. In addition, numerous studies are carried out to find new cures and improve the efficiency of available radioactive therapies. Consequently, there is an increase in the production of radioactive waste, which poses numerous hazards to patients, radiation workers, and the environment.

The National Regulatory Commission along with federal agencies oversees the use of radionuclides and the management of the ensuing waste. As a result, policies that ensure the safety of all involved parties have been set. The effective management of radioactive waste from medical facilities involves proper education and the provision of the appropriate facilities in the medical facilities that handle radioactive waste.

Introduction

Radioactive waste can be defined as the spin-offs of reactions that emit radionuclides. Hospitals and clinics extensively use radioactive isotopes for investigative and restorative purposes. Consequently, these establishments spawn voluminous quantities of waste that are considered harmful bearing in mind the obvious possibility of transmission of infections. It is estimated that health facilities release approximately two kilograms of waste per bed daily (Khan et al. 40).

On average, about 80% of the waste poses no threat while 10% is infectious. The remaining fraction does not cause infection although it is harmful. Increasing incidences of viral infections such as hepatitis and HIV/AIDS have led to increased concerns on the management of hospital waste. Consequently, numerous policies have been developed to ensure secure and reliable methods of waste disposal are used.

The advancement in medical technology has seen the increased use of radioactive isotopes in the diagnosis and treatment of various conditions. The commonly used isotopes in the medical field include Carbon-14, the three isotopes of Iodine (123, 125, and 130), Technetium-99m, Fluorine-18, and Tritium (Khan et al. 40). In addition, thousands of studies involving nuclear medicine continue to be performed all over the world. This paper discusses the types of medical radioactive waste generated in hospitals, regulations governing the management of radioactive waste, and facilities that handle radioactive waste.

Types of Medical Radioactive Waste Generated in Hospitals

Waste from health facilities causes two classes of hazards, which are classified as radiological and non-radiological hazards. Radiological hazards include the exposure of individuals to lethal doses of radioactive radiation. Non-radiological hazards, on the other hand, are further grouped into physical, chemical, infectious, and explosive hazards. Physical dangers include the possibility of bodily injuries such as cuts and bruises from medical equipment while chemical injuries include the possibility of undesirable chemical reactions from the mixing of incompatible wastes. Biological waste or biohazards are medical waste contaminated with human blood or other body fluids, which pose a risk of transmitting infectious diseases (Evdokimoff, Cash, Buckley, and Cardenas 209).

The radioactive waste generated by health facilities can be categorized into six main groups namely gaseous waste, liquid waste, general waste, spent sealed sources, solid waste, and decommissioning waste (International Atomic Energy Agency 8). Radioactive waste in the liquid form includes polluted water from chemical processes, solvents, discarded liquid radiopharmaceuticals, chemotherapeutic medications, polluted soils, and scintillation liquids.

The waste also includes body fluids such as urine and blood. Investigative imaging for the evaluation of lung function often uses radioactive gases such as Xenon-133 and ^81mKr. The properties of these gases hinder the efficacy of gas treatment processes. Consequently, the only available option is to release the gases to the surroundings via exhaust pipes.

Radioactive waste in solid form comes from protective garments, gloves, masks, filters, paper wipes, metal, syringes, glass vials, and plastic sheets among many other items (Krieger, Van Baalen and Walters 109). These items are mainly used during medical procedures that involve radioactive radiations. In addition, clothing and utensils used by patients receiving elevated dosages of radiation therapy such as Iodine-121 also make up radioactive waste material. Radioactive waste in solid form contains small quantities of radioactive material compared to liquid waste.

The termination of the clinical life of sources of radioactive radiation leads to the generation of radioactive waste, which needs to be discarded safely. Such substances are referred to as spent sealed sources and are divided into four categories depending on the concentration of radioactive substances and their half-lives. The first category comprises waste such as ¹⁹²Ir, which has elevated levels of activity and short half-lives. The second category includes substances with low levels of activity, which often find use as standards and calibration reagents. The third class encompasses substances that pose a higher risk of exposure due to emanation and leakage. These substances require stringent measures when handling them. The final category includes waste with low levels of radioactivity and half-lives that surpass 100 days.

Medical facilities such as oncology centers sometimes use accelerators during their operations. The decommissioning of these accelerators may lead to the emission of neutrons whose energy exceeds 10 MeV. Such neutrons lead to unnecessary activation of the surrounding materials.

Regulations guiding the Use of Radioactive Substances for Medical Purposes

The responsibility of regulating the medical usage of ionizing radiation is disseminated among several authorities such as the National Regulatory Council (NRC), federal states, and regional government organizations. The NRC is charged with the mandate of controlling the possession and use of byproduct and source radioactive substances in the medical field. Byproduct material is useful in processes such as calibration of equipment, manufacture of radioactive drugs, analysis of bone minerals, and gadgets that carry out fluorescence imaging and brachytherapy (NRC par. 1).

Source material, on the other hand, is utilized in radiation protection and designing of equalizers in some gadgets. In addition, certain models of pacemakers are run by cells that contain nuclear substances. Therefore, the NRC provides special licenses to authorize the use of byproducts for purposes other than the administration of carbon-14 containing capsules during in vivo diagnostics. This license applies to four categories of byproduct materials as stipulated by 10 CFR Part 35. The four categories are diagnostic medical use, therapeutic medical use, medical research, and in vitro diagnostic tools.

In medical diagnostic use, the usage of byproduct radioactive material is indicated in radioactive uptake, strength, secretion, imaging, or diagnosis of conditions at localized positions in medical or research processes. The associations of radiolabeled medications with bodily processes help in getting medical data. In such procedures, it is required that sealed sources provide the radiations necessary for the imaging procedures, which may be aimed at establishing tissue density. The use of portable imaging gadgets in dentists and podiatry also falls under this category.

Therapeutic medical use of radioactive material entails the delivery of analgesic or curative medications to their target organs with the aid of nuclear materials. In most instances, such therapies are applicable in the treatment of cancer. However, other mild conditions such as restenosis (blocked blood vessels) can also be managed by intravascular brachytherapy radiation.

Under medical research use, the application of byproduct materials in human candidates is only allowed when the researcher has a 10 CFR Part 35 medicinal use approval. Nuclear material can be used in human subjects in several ways such as observing a human research subject’s response to a treatment that does not contain radioactive material using a radioactive substance. It may also entail clinical investigations to establish the safety and efficacy of novel radioactive drugs or gadgets. Nevertheless, the actual medical investigation must comply with the stipulations of the 10 CFR Part 35 regarding the possession and use of byproduct materials.

The use of byproduct radioactive materials during ex vivo indicative investigations applies only to health facilities and private doctors with the controlled substance as in vitro indicative analysis kits. These individuals are exempted from the stipulations of the ‘medical use license’ since these items are not included in 10 CFR Part 35.

However, the NRC only oversees the management of certain groups of radioactive substances in the medical field. These categories include byproduct materials (those generated by reactors), source materials (uranium and thorium and their related waste), and special nuclear material, which includes substances contaminated with uranium and plutonium. The usage and management of other radioactive waste such as innate radioactive substances (radium and radon), “particle-accelerator produced radioactive material” and machines that spawn radioactive radiations are under the jurisdiction of the State (International Agency of Atomic Energy 13). As a result, pharmaceuticals that perform positron-emitting tomography are regulated by the State.

Management of Radioactive Waste

The most important aspect of hospital waste management is ensuring that any unused radioactive substances, as well as items contaminated with the waste, are eliminated safely. It is vital to make certain that radiation workers and the entire community are not exposed to radiation concentrations that surpass the set threshold. Observing radiation exposure limits minimizes the possibility of short-lived and long-standing consequences of ionizing radiation in humans and animals. In addition, proper radioactive waste practices safeguard the environment from the harmful effects of radiation. Therefore, it is vital that any health facility that intends to use radioactive isotopes guarantees that structural and functional considerations are in place to contain radiations within permissible levels.

The management of radiation must uphold the fundamental tenets for radiation protection. These tenets include the principle of justification of practice where radiation is only used if the benefits prevail over the dangers. Another principle is the optimization of practice where the quantity of individual doses and the number of people in contact with the radiations is kept to the minimum possible (the ALARA principle). In addition, every hospital worker should be examined to assess the effects of exposure. The surroundings of the hospital ought to be regularly scrutinized to ensure that damage to the environment does not occur.

Conversely, radiation equipment should be monitored to ascertain that they meet the required standards that protect the workers from radiation risks. Each health facility must also have a certified radiation safety officer to supervise all facets of radioactive waste management in conformity with the NRC and the International Commission on Radiation Protection.

The International Atomic Energy Agency provides a sequential procedure for the management of radioactive waste in a medical facility (13). The scheme begins with the purchase of the radioactive isotopes followed by the application of the isotope, which leads to the production of radioactive waste. The collected waste is then separated according to its characteristics. For example, the waste can be separated according to the half-life where radioisotopes with long half-lives are separated from those with short half-lives. The waste can also be separated according to the type of radioactive radiation emitted.

For instance, gamma-emitting waste is separated from beta-emitting waste. The long-living waste then undergoes a pretreatment process followed by a final treatment procedure at a central waste treatment facility. The short-lived waste, on the other hand, is stored to allow it to undergo radioactive decay. Thereafter, a control measurement is performed to ensure that complete decay has taken place after which four main steps are performed.

The first step is a treatment for disinfection followed by incineration of non-biodegradable waste. Quality control is then performed to ascertain that the waste does not pose any hazard to the environment. The treated waste is ultimately released as municipal refuse. Separation of the waste is crucial because it determines the effectiveness of the quality control steps. It is difficult to determine whether complete decay has taken place when looking for the emission of beta particles in the presence of gamma-emitting waste in the same sample.

The management of radioactive waste from medical facilities varies from one country to another because the frequencies and levels of operations that use radioactive radiation vary from country to country. However, the above-mentioned procedure guides the management of radioactive waste from medical facilities regardless of the country. In Finland, for example, 33 out of 43 nuclear medicine departments carry out radionuclide therapy (European Commission 18).

There is a distinct location for in vitro analysis far from the nuclear medicine departments. In addition, each facility has very few employees whose number does not exceed twenty (European Commission 20). Each facility has three radiation specialists namely a physicist, a radiochemist, and a nuclear medicine doctor. Various operations are performed in specialized rooms, which are situated in one restricted region. These rooms include a groundwork area, an injection area, and a patient assessment room. A waiting area with sanitary installations is also available for patients. The waste collection room is set apart in an isolated section. However, the waste collection room may be adjacent to the groundwork room.

Requests to purchase radioactive materials are handled under the control of the radiation safety officer. In addition, deliveries are made straight to the facility to prevent damage and misplacement of radioactive materials. Records of all purchases are then kept carefully and backed up on computers. The storage of radioactive materials is in the groundwork room, which is also referred to as the preparation room or “hot area.” Thereafter, the prepared doses are taken to the treatment room in the form of injections or capsules. The ensuing waste is then gathered in the hot room or an adjacent room from where transfers to the waste storage areas are made.

The preparation of universally documented procedures is another useful feature in the effective management of radioactive waste. The guides include the precise details of the necessary procedures such as the steps to follow when segregating waste at the source and the right containers to be used for waste collection. In addition, the members of staff ought to receive adequate training in the management of waste. The overall management of the facility needs to provide support to ensure that the set policies regarding radioactive waste are implemented (International Atomic Energy Agency 13).

Another useful strategy in the management of radioactive refuse is the diminution of their production in medical facilities. This strategy should aim at lowering the quantities and activities of radioactive waste. A study carried out by Krieger, Van Baalen and Walters (109) reveals that reducing the volume of radioactive waste not only increases the efficiency of the management process but also lowers the overall costs incurred in waste treatment. The need to use radionuclides in the treatment of patients should be justified. Consequently, the lowest effective dose should be computed, and only the right quantities are obtained (Siegel 50).

Research experiments should also be designed appropriately to determine the right quantities of radionuclides to be used. The possibility of using alternative treatments or technologies should also be considered to minimize the production of radioactive waste. For example, the utilization of chemiluminescent and colorimetric assays instead of radioimmunoassay is a wise decision in minimizing radioactive waste. If radionuclides must be used, then short-lived radionuclides should be utilized instead of long-lived ones because short-lived radionuclides allow storage for decay and elimination at clearance levels. Additionally, non-radioactive waste should not be mixed with radioactive materials. Such a move diminishes the volume of radioactive waste by lowering cross-contamination and eliminating the need for decontamination steps.

Facilities that Handle Radioactive Waste

Facilities that handle radioactive waste need to be well planned from the beginning to ensure that they are capable of handling the waste effectively. A complete waste management program is obtained by making an exhaustive prior evaluation to ensure that the key objective is to prevent and minimize waste while safeguarding against the harmful effects that come from the waste. The evaluation involves meticulous analysis of the entire radionuclide record and usage patterns, the type of waste, and the quantities generated. The assessment also needs to consider the possible methods of disposal.

However, the assessment should be performed at the initial planning stages before a facility is created so that certain specialized features can be incorporated in the building plan of the facility (International Atomic Energy Agency 12). However, in certain instances where there is an existing facility, the evaluation may still be performed to improve the efficacy of the waste treatment process. In such cases, it is vital to harmonize the waste management activities of the various laboratories within the facility. Nevertheless, the appropriate waste management practices can only be chosen following an evaluation of all uses of radionuclides within the facility.

Conclusion

The production of medical waste is inevitable due to the rising need for radionuclides in research and therapeutics. Such waste poses extensive risks to workers in medical and research facilities. However, careful planning and observation of the policies that govern the use and management of radioactive materials can go a long way in mitigating these dangers. Facilities that generate medical radioactive waste need to be adequately equipped to handle their waste without exposing their workers to radiation hazards. In addition, the workers need to have sufficient training to ensure that the right procedures are followed in the management of radioactive waste.

Works Cited

European Commission 1999, Management of Radioactive Waste Arising from Medical Establishments in the European Union. Web.

Evdokimoff, Victor, Charles Cash, Kevin Buckley, and Ariosto Cardenas. “Potential for Radioactive Patient Excreta in Hospital Trash and Medical Waste.” Health Physics 66.2 (1994):209-211. Print.

International Atomic Energy Agency. Management of Radioactive Waste from the Use of Radionuclides in Medicine, Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency, 2002. Print.

Khan, Shoukat, Syed AT, Reyaz Ahmad, Tanveer A. Rather, Ajaz M, and Jan FA. “Radioactive Waste Management in A Hospital.” International Journal of Health Sciences, Quassim University 4.1(2010):39-46. Print.

Krieger, Kenneth, Mary Van Baalen and Christopher Walters. “Radioactive Waste Minimization at a Large Academic Medical Facility.” Radiation Safety Journal 82.5(2001): 108-110. Print.

NRC n.d., Medical Uses of Nuclear Materials. Web.

Siegel, Jeffry A. Guide for diagnostic nuclear medicine. Reston, Virginia: Society of Nuclear Medicine, 2002. Print.

Introduction

Establishing an industrial plant in any area usually has its share of benefits and harm on the locals. Particularly, construction of a smelting plant raises certain public health and social concerns. A feasibility study usually precedes the construction of any significant plant. The study assesses the credibility of the area to sustain the facility and the effect on the public health and environment. A legal memo is developed based on the conclusion of the study, and it outlines the legal issues that would emanate from the construction of the plant. The City of Riverside has asked for a legal memo outlining the potential regulations that could be developed to help limit the effect of the proposed expansion on public health, environment, and social live of the people. This paper investigates the effect the proposed expansion of RRE international company will impose on public health and environment. Particularly, the paper will focus on specific elements of RRE expansion including coal-fired power plant, water discharges into the Long Trout River from the smelter, and the low-income neighborhood proposed for the situation of the smelter. Thus, this memo is divided into three sections corresponding to the mentioned elements.

Operation of the Coal-fired Power Plant

Despite the benefits that will accompany the coal-fired power plant, including jobs opportunities, electricity and so forth, it raises concern about the likelihood of its adverse effects on the visibility and air quality inside and around the City of Riverside. The parties involved need to balance between benefits and adverse effects the establishment of a coal power plant might have, so that the company may implement strategies to reduce the impact of Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs).

Impact on the environment and public health

Coal-fired power plants are an important source of hazardous air pollutants such as nitrogen dioxide, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, and particulate. Additionally, such plants are the main point source category of arsenic, mercury, and hydrochloric acid emissions to air…In fact, a study in eastern Ohio attributed 70% of the mercury contained in rainfall to coal combustion (Environmental Health & Engineering [EHE], 2011, p.1).

These hazardous air pollutants can cause various negative health effects including injury to respiratory tract, eyes, and skin; negative effects on the critical organs such as kidney, lungs, and nerve system; the capacity to cause cancer; cardiovascular and pulmonary conditions; and impairment of nerve functions and learning ability. In addition, hazardous air pollutants from coal-fired power plants increase exposure to mercury in food, and airborne metal particulates places the major risk to public health and environment. Indeed, the coal-fired power plants may contribute considerably to deposition of mercury in water and soil.

Environment Protection Agency (EPA) has linked increased cases of cardiovascular conditions to fine particulate matter release into the air by a coal-fired power plant. In addition, particulate matter is responsible for increased cases of breathing problems and respiratory conditions including asthma (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA], 2010). EHE states that the environmental adverse effect of air pollutants emission include acidification, bioaccumulation of hazardous metals, contamination of oceans, lakes, and rivers, reduced visibility, and degradation of structures and monuments (2011, p.2).

Regulatory recommendations

The RRE Company must ensure that the stacks for expelling HAPs into the air must be as tall as possible because lower stacks lead to increased impacts near the source compared to higher stacks. Coal-fired power plants in the United States use stack heights ranging between 15 feet to 1.040 feet above the ground (USEPA, 2010). Coal-fired power plants are the leading emitters of mercury, acid gases, and toxic metals. The company should ensure utilization of technologies that are proven to help reduce emission of HAPs. The federal government should develop the standards for power plants to restrain their emission of HPAs, because there is none, although effective technologies are available to reduce emission of HAPs (EHE, 2011, p. 26). The company should also consider constructing the facility no less than one mile from residential and the Long Trout River. This recommendation is sound because, the greatest impacts of HAPs emissions on the ground level from coal-fired plant are normally within a mile’s range of the plant (EHE, 2011, p.26).

Operation of Smelter

Impact on public health and environment

Water used in a smelter cooling system and boiler usually accumulates pollutants. If the polluted water is discharged to the Long Trout River, pollutants can harm both flora and fauna. It might result in death of the fishes in the river. In addition, according to USEPA (2010), if rain falls on the metal ore reserved in heaps outside the facility, the runoffs flush heavy metals from the ore pile, especially lead and arsenic and wash them into the nearby Long Trout River. Other heavy metals associated with water discharge from smelters include manganese, selenium, nickel, chromium, cadmium, and beryllium. Such heavy metals are carcinogenic and may cause cancer of the lung, skin, kidney, and bladder. In addition, the toxic metals may negatively affect immune, respiratory, dermal, cardiovascular, and nervous system. Moreover, lead harms the developing nerves, and impairs learning, memory, and behavior. In addition, it may cause kidney and cardiovascular conditions, anemia, and weakness of the ankles, fingers, and wrist.

Regulatory recommendations

The RRE Company should ensure that the facility minimizes water discharges, and treat polluted water and recycle it to minimize contamination of water. In addition, the storm-water management program should include provision to control runoff and divert run-on away from the Large Trout River. The smelter stack height should be designed to raise the emission higher than the valley air zone to better improve dispersion. This caution may help reduce impact of HAPs. In addition, electrostatic receptors should be installed in the stacks to remove particulates from emissions. The company should install beneficiation, which include “thermal, electrochemical, chemical, magnetic, gravitational, and mechanical techniques for separating heavy metals from discharge water” (Science Applications International Corporation [SAIC], 1995). Moreover, the facility should have process cushion, ponds, and piping structures for cooling and boilers water, incorporated with containment ponds to prevent release of discharge waters.

Site of Smelter

Impact on public health

Public health issues that may arise from the situation of the smelter include health problems arising from metals emissions. Exposure to sulfur dioxide poses a temporary public health problem to asthmatic. According to the Agency for Toxic Substance & Disease Register [ATSDR] (2009), metal particulates in the air may lead to increased lung cancer mortality rates. Adults and children playing and working in their yards and nearby contaminated areas are more exposed to pollutants because all residence is linked to a community water supply from the Large Trout River and contaminated water is a key source of exposure (ATSDR, 2009).

Lead poisoning is another public health concern attributed to smelters. Lead contact in children is especially hazardous since they absorb lead more easily relative to adults. Lead affects the growth and development of preschool children and cause learning disability and effects that are more serious. High lead levels impair several body systems including “neurological, renal, reproductive, gastrointestinal, and hematopoietic systems in the body…impairment of the neurological system in children that lead to behavioral and developmental problem” (ATSDR, 2009). In addition, arsenic exposure is associated with certain public health concern. Arsenic has negative affects on the respiratory tract, central nervous system, the kidneys, the hematopoietic, the heart, and the liver.

General recommendations

The RRE Company should take remedial action to circumvent exposure during clean-up activities. The company and/or the government should educate the public on the negative health effects associated with lead and arsenic emission from prospective smelter. ATSDR (2009) argues that such awareness should encompass methods of controlling and lowering exposure to contaminated dust during the cleanup. “Blood level lead testing for children between age 0-5 old who have not been initially tested, and follow-up blood screening for lead in 6 months interval during the clean up” (ATSDR, 2009).

Conclusion

Although expansion of plant has obvious beneficial results to the general economy and the local community, its adverse effects can outweigh the benefits. Therefore, government agencies and community representatives must ensure that proper preventive measures are put in place to curb such adverse effects. The right of the citizen must always be a priority.

Reference list

Agency for Toxic Substances & Disease Register [ATSDR]. (2009). Public health Assessment & health consultation. Buford: Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry. Web.

Environmental Health & Engineering [EHE]. (2011). Emission of hazardous air Pollutants from coal-fired power plants. Needham: Environmental Health & Engineering, Inc

Science Applications International Corporation [SAIC]. (1995). Pollution prevention Environmental impact reduction checklists for nepa/309 reviewers U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Federal Activities.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2010). Water discharge. Web.

Definition

Medical waste is “waste sufficiently capable of causing infection during handling and disposal.”

Synonyms

Biomedical waste, biohazardous waste, clinical waste, regulated medical waste (RMW), healthcare waste, infectious medical waste.

Types of medical waste

• Sharps – Needles, lancets, glass shards, razors, scalpels, and other objects that can pierce one’s skin.
• Infectious – Used swabs, equipment, lab cultures, tissues, and excreta.
• Radioactive – Radiotherapy and lab research liquids, including contaminated holding containers.
• Pathological – Contaminated animal carcasses, human tissue, body parts, blood, and other bodily fluids.
• Pharmaceuticals – Vaccines, antibiotics, pills, and injectables that are expired, unused, or contaminated.
• Chemical – Heavy metals for medical equipment (mercury), batteries, solvents, and disinfectants.
• Genotoxic – Highly dangerous waste that can be teratogenic, carcinogenic, or mutagenic (drugs for cancer treatment).
• General non-regulated – this type of waste is non-hazardous.

Healthcare providers must follow the national and state regulations, such as the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). One must never dispose of waste in improper ways. For instance, prescription drugs should never be flushed down the drain or toilet unless specified on the label or patient information. These drugs can be disposed of through community pharmaceutical return programs or collection events.

To dispose of prescription drugs, one must take them out of their containers, mix them with an undesirable substance, put them in a disposal container with a lid, remove all personal information, and place the sealed container with this mixture trash.

Sharps are a health hazard for the public. Thus, they should be disposed of properly. One must not put shards in the waste bin without a specifically designed container. Removing an already tossed needle from the waste should not be attempted.

Medical centers can have onsite and offsite medical waste treatments. The former is expensive to maintain and manage and is used by large organizations. Smaller facilities can use offsite treatment by hiring third-party vendors that collect and dispose of waste by using mail or truck services.

Waste processing

Waste can be processed in the following ways:

• Incineration – Currently, the only method used for pathological waste. In 1997, the EPA regulations changed to restrict the use of burning as a primary type of waste disposal. Before this date, more than 90% of all waste was incinerated.
• Autoclaving – This method uses steam sterilization. It can make biohazardous waste non-infectious. After the procedure, the waste can be disposed of in standard ways.
• Microwaving – By microwaving waste, one can render it non-hazardous. Processed waste becomes non-infectious.
• Chemical – It is used for chemical waste primarily. Reactive chemicals neutralize some types of waste and make them inert.
• Biological – This method is used for infectious organisms. It uses enzymes and is highly experimental.

Steps of medical waste disposal

Knowing the laws is crucial for healthcare workers to classify and dispose of medical waste. The following steps should be remembered:

• Separate waste by type – The types are mentioned above.
• Use proper containers – One must use approved containers for each waste type.
• Prepare containers – All containers must be taped and packaged following the Department of Transportation (DOT) weight restrictions. All containers must be labeled and stored in a secure area before shipping.
• Include documentation – Proper documentation can protect the healthcare provider and the hired firm and be included with every container.
• Use a color code – Sharps go in red puncture-proof containers. Biohazard waste goes in red containers/bags. Chemical waste goes in yellow containers. Pharmaceutical waste goes in black (hazardous) or blue (non-hazardous) containers. Radioactive waste should be stored in shielded containers with a radioactive symbol.
• Hire a reliable waste disposal company.

Introduction to E-waste

This is a research paper on E-waste disposal. The research paper will describe the effects of computer components on the environment upon their disposal. It will also state the current laws at the federal level in the United States and of a few states, like Tennesse.

The research paper will equally describe the current environmental policies related to E-waste disposal while noting the organizations that proposed these policies. It will, however, show how difficult it is implementing these policies. The research paper will informatively highlight and explain the possible alternative approaches of tackling E-waste disposal.

Nevertheless, what is E-waste disposal? E-waste disposal is a prominent, informal name for electronic products like stereos, computers, VCRs, copiers, televisions, and fax machines that are nearing or at the end of their useful life. Some researchers have estimated that about 75 percent of old electronics are yet to be disposed. This is as a result of the uncertainties on waste management. Additionally, with the robust growth in technology and eminent new products to be introduced in the market, E-waste becomes our point of concern.

Unfortunately, although many of these products can be recycled, reused or refurbished, they have been disposed hazardously, and their effects are being felt globally. E-waste is thus damaging the environment and hence regulations are necessary on the disposal of these items to contain the dire effects of their disposal.

Effects of E-waste to the Environment

E-waste disposal is destroying the environment in various ways depending on the type of the electronic disposed and the method of disposal. Depending on the condition and density of some components of given electronic products, these materials can be rendered hazardous.

In California, nonfunctioning cathode-ray tubes from televisions and monitors are regarded hazardous. They lead to global warming. The uncontrolled recycling process contaminates the soil, air and water with harmful acid and mercury materials. However, the actual results of this contamination are realized in health and economic concerns.

When these materials, are disposed off improperly, they are burned or end up in water supplies creating an inevitable consumption that harms those who are unfortunate to live in proximity to these conditions. The black-markets which often buys the e-wastes to extract the valuable materials later on burn them, which winds up causing diseases to many of the innocent inhabitants.

Condensation and precipitation of burning plastics add fumes from PVCs and PAHs to the global air stream into local water supplies. The vaporization of mercury in uncontrolled fires equally causes health and environmental risks. Tetra Bromo Bisphenol-A (TBBPA) is toxic to aquatic organisms.

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) destroy the ozone layer. Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers drip and contaminate water^[1] PDA, and digital cameras contain toxins that damage the environment once released. Metal components in phones like lead, mercury, cadmium, antimony, and arsenic are all toxic in the body systems as they cause diseases like kidney failure, lung diseases and high blood pressure once taken into the body.

History and facts about E-waste disposal

Before the 1970s, there was a little production of these technologically complicated items but as devices of higher technology came to existence in the latter half of the 20th century, the term electronic waste also came to be. The complicated devices recently introduced consist of over 1,000 different substances. Some of these components are toxic and create serious pollution upon disposal. The production of more electronic devices has increased rapidly in recent times and newer devices are consequently, thrown out.

Though this began in the most developed nations such as the United States and Japan, America remains one of the biggest origins of electronic waste. America is said to dump between 300 million and 400 million electronic items per year, and only about 20% of this e-waste is recycled. In a month, about 50 millions cell phones are replaced worldwide and only 10%of these are recycled.

In the 1990s, the European Union banned e-waste from landfills, and current laws hold manufacturers responsible for e-waste disposal. Unfortunately, large amounts of e-waste have been sent to countries such as China, India and Kenya, where there are lower environmental standards. Most significantly is that E-waste legislation in the United States is currently stalled at the state level.

Possible Solutions to e-waste Disposal

Subject to the growing technological advancements, it is necessary to device ways that can minimize or completely solve problems related to e-waste disposal or management. Manufacturers of electronic products should take responsibility for their production, use and disposal. Manufacturers should design electronic products with long lifespan, safe products, and low risk products and easy to recycle commodities, which are not hazardous to the environment.

Citizens should support companies that make clean electronic products and considerably return used up products to the manufacturers. Relevantly, buyers should think twice before buying a product. The government should make and enforce laws that govern proper disposal of e-waste. Citizens and manufacturers should abide to these rules for a better environment and health standards. Law breakers should be punished severely.

Hazardous materials should not be used to manufacture E-products, and the taxpayer should not bear the cost of recycling old electronics. In this case, manufacturers should take total responsibility for their products until they reach the end of their useful life. After this, manufacturers should take their goods back for re-use, safe recycling or disposal.^[2]

Criteria for Solutions to e-waste Disposal

The utmost responsibility of managing e-waste disposal lies with the government. As of such the government should make sure that e-waste is properly disposed by making laws, enforcing them and supervising their implementation. The government should also encourage and support companies that manufacture clean electronic products as well as banning those that violate this policy.

Manufactures also have a responsibility in manufacturing clean products, manufacturing products with a long life span, take them back after the end of useful life and relevantly dispose, re-use or recycle them. Buyers should support companies that manufacture clean products and dispose them properly where possible. Thus, the criteria will go down with responsibility and all stakeholders in this industry should feel the need, actualize it and practice proper e-waste disposal.^[3]

Evaluate Solution Idea

The best solution should be timely, effective, cheap and logical. However, the laws that are there are helping partly to eliminate the problem, and as such we may need stricter laws.

Development of the best idea

The best idea should have the support of the federal government, the manufacturers and the citizens. This is not the case in this context, there is no agreement between the manufacturers and the government concerning disposal of E-product wastes.^[4]

Conclusion

E-waste is damaging the environment, and regulations are necessary on the disposal of these items. The problem of e-waste disposal exists throughout the world.

People and companies are dumping e-waste without much regulation. The possible outcome would be large amounts of mercury and other chemicals poisoning the earth. Individual people and companies, actually everyone is involved. In the future, the cost could be extensive to clean up any chemicals; land could possibly be unusable in the future. But the federal government, individual states, companies and individual people all have opinions on the matter.

Currently, there are no federal regulations on dumping. Each state has its own regulations for the disposal of e-waste. States have their own regulations. Most of these states say that certain items such as CRT monitors, motherboards, batteries and more have to be disposed off in certain manners and/or recycled. These regulations have helped to reduce the amount of e-waste in landfills. However, strict regulations should be made to recycle or more safely dispose off all these wastes on a federal level and across all states.

The regulations are currently only under state laws, not federal laws. Changes to current laws and regulations would have to be changed to make this a possible solution. These changes would only take place as long as it would for the laws and regulations to be changed. But significantly, the Current regulations have helped reduce contamination from e-waste, but they do not eliminate contamination.

The proposed solution would reduce contamination from e-waste by a very large amount, but a person or company could still avoid following regulations. In that case Government officials and the support of most people would be required to make these changes possible. The federal government should be responsible for implementing the solution. The will should come from the people and the manufacturers.

Bibliography

Do something.org. 11 Facts about E-Waste. Web.

Scribd. Effects of e-waste on environment and health. Web.

Recycling for Charities. Electronic waste environmental effects. Web.

GREENPEACE. E-Waste Solutions. Web.

California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery. What Is E-Waste. Web.

Footnotes

1. Scribd, Effects of e-waste on environment and health.
2. GREENPEACE, “E-Waste Solutions”.
3. Scribd, Effects of e-waste on environment and health.
4. Recycling for Charities, Electronic waste environmental effects.

Introduction

Solid waste disposal and management are critical tasks that are insufficiently addressed by the municipality, as can be seen from a negative outlook for the continuation of the existing landfill. In addition, the idea of relocating is not an optimal solution to the problem since it will only postpone the adverse consequences of the examined challenge. From this point of view, the suggestion to introduce alternative methods of processing solid waste is required, but numerous difficulties accompany this decision. They are mostly related to the economic, social, and environmental aspects of community life alongside population health.

Any proposals in this regard should be assessed by evaluating the impact of corresponding factors. Hence, the introduction of solid waste recycling or incineration as the possible ways of improving the situation is connected to the above areas. At the same time, the latter approach seems more beneficial from the efficiency perspective.

Two Alternatives: Comparison

Economy

The economy is the first sphere of influence, which correlates with adopting practices for solid waste management. This connection is explained by the need to redistribute valuable resources, which stems from the project. Scholars claim that this standpoint applies to the economic operations of municipalities and households, which are to be aware of the adopted methods (Mwanza & Mbohwa, 2017).

From this perspective, the necessity to recycle specific types of waste is easier to explain to the citizens than the benefits of incineration, as the former approach is more explicit. In other words, people recognize their responsibility for disposing of solid waste and see the advantages of sorting the garbage from the perspective of the usefulness of different materials in the long run. On the contrary, the conversion of non-recyclable substances into energy is not shown, and the lack of participation in performing this task (The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2020). Therefore, incineration will require additional efforts of the officers intended to educate the population regarding the economic advantages of this solution to gain their support, which is not required when recycling.

Society

The second consideration, which affects the subsequent decision regarding adopting alternatives for efficient solid waste management, is social drivers. They include public awareness of the population dynamics, which determine the necessity to modify the procedures, such as, for example, the growth of consumer needs and, consequently, waste (Mwanza & Mbohwa, 2017). This area is intertwined with the economy since there is a correlation between the number of people and the resources they need, and it also contributes to the promotion of education among citizens (Mwanza & Mbohwa, 2017).

Nevertheless, its role in the selection of management methods is not the same since it implies the inclusion of communities in work and the change in behavior on a more global level. In this case, there is no essential difference between recycling and incineration as both approaches can be efficiently introduced after the allocation of funds on corresponding campaigns for increasing awareness (Exposito & Velasco, 2018). For them, the main factor determining the success of the initiative will be the technological readiness of the municipality to implement the project rather than societal issues.

Environment

The third aspect, which is one of the most vital factors for determining a better alternative for the municipality under consideration, is environmental impacts. From this perspective, the suggested methods are drastically different, and this fact explains the importance of such choices in the long run. The first approach, recycling, is reported to be insufficiently developed to fully replace landfills to ensure the safety of solid waste disposal; however, its potential is great for further development (Exposito & Velasco, 2018). For instance, according to a recent study, sustainable recycling of post-consumer plastic waste is an efficient way to protect the environment while preventing climate change or global warming (Mwanza & Mbohwa, 2017). Meanwhile, these statements do not ensure further opportunities for improving the existing practices, and this circumstance does not allow viewing recycling as the most efficient long-term environmental initiative.

In turn, incineration is a more complicated process, which, nevertheless, also has its benefits in this respect. According to Ashraf et al. (2019), the latest ideas concerning the use of residues of this alternative, such as the production of eco-cement, allow reducing emissions due to the storage of carbon dioxide. This achievement adds to the possibility of further promoting this method as eco-friendly, and the potential recovery of energy when applying combustion technologies is invaluable (The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2020). Thus, incineration is more advantageous than recycling from the viewpoint of environmental issues and their development, which the introduction of new practices for managing solid waste can foster.

Health

The fourth and final factor, which affects the selection of solid waste management practices, is population health. In terms of the increasing focus on sustainability, it plays a significant role in the planning process (Marshall & Farahbakhsh, 2013). Hence, recycling is optimal for people’s wellbeing since it does not lead to any critical consequences in this respect (Marshall & Farahbakhsh, 2013). As for incineration, the harm is connected to potentially hazardous emissions and gaseous pollutants in the atmosphere and, therefore, cannot be viewed as a safe way to reduce waste (Ashraf et al., 2019). In this case, the introduction of the latter method will require additional measures for protecting citizens’ health, and the costs of performing this task reduce the feasibility of its application.

The Best Applicable Approach to the Scenario

The conducted comparison reveals the benefits and drawbacks of recycling and incineration as alternatives to landfills in the municipality and allows a conclusion on the latter’s feasibility to comply with the goals. This choice also corresponds to the objectives of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, which include corrective action or cleanup (The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2021).

Thus, the rationale for the selection of this method is better efficiency in coping with the growing amounts of waste, which is the community’s problem. Even though recycling is more beneficial in terms of clarity for citizens and their health, it does not contribute to making a change within the specified time limits. Moreover, incineration’s harm to health can be addressed through the elaboration of preventive measures, which are not more expensive than the development of recycling practices with dubious effectiveness.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the examination of recycling and incineration as the ways to solve the municipality’s problem with the situation regarding inefficient solid waste management was based on economic, societal, environmental, and health considerations. Their comparison of these factors showed that the latter alternative is more suitable for the current tasks of this community. In this way, both methods are economically feasible, socially acceptable, and relatively eco-friendly, but recycling is insufficient for improving the system’s functioning in a timely manner.

References

Ashraf, M. S., Ghouleh, Z., & Shao, Y. (2019). Production of eco-cement exclusively from municipal solid waste incineration residues. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 149, 332-342. Web.

Exposito, A., & Velasco, F. (2018). Municipal solid-waste recycling market and the European 2020 Horizon Strategy: A regional efficiency analysis in Spain. Journal of Cleaner Production, 172, 938-948. Web.

Marshall, R. E., & Farahbakhsh, K. (2013). Systems approaches to integrated solid waste management in developing countries. Waste Management, 33(4), 988-1003. Web.

Mwanza, B. G., & Mbohwa, C. (2017). Drivers to sustainable plastic solid waste recycling: A review. Procedia Manufacturing, 8, 649-656. Web.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2020). Energy recovery from the combustion of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). Web.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2021). Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) overview. Web.