5 Solid and Hazardous Waste
Managing Growing Waste Generation
An enormous quantity of waste is generated and disposed of annually. Alarmingly, this quantity continues to increase on an annual basis. Industries generate and dispose of over 7.6 billion tons of industrial solid wastes each year, and it is estimated that over 40 million tons of this waste is hazardous. Nuclear wastes, as well as medical wastes, are also increasing in quantity every year.
Generally speaking, developed nations generate more waste than developing nations due to higher consumption rates. Not surprisingly, the United States generates more waste per capita than any other country. High waste per capita rates are also very common throughout Europe and developed nations in Asia and Oceania. In the United States, about 243 million tons (243 trillion kg) of MSW is generated annually, equal to about 4.3 pounds (1.95 kg) of waste per person per day. Nearly 34 percent of MSW is recovered and recycled or composted, approximately 12 percent is burned in combustion facilities, and the remaining 54 percent is disposed of in landfills. Waste stream percentages also vary widely by region. For example, San Francisco, California, captures and recycles nearly 75 percent of its waste material, whereas Houston, Texas, recycles less than three percent.
Concerning waste mitigation options, landfilling is quickly evolving into a less desirable or feasible option. Landfill capacity in the United States has been declining primarily due to (a) older existing landfills that are increasingly reaching their authorized capacity, (b) the promulgation of stricter environmental regulations has made the permitting and siting of new landfills increasingly difficult, (c) public opposition (e.g., “Not In My Backyard” or NIMBYism) delays or, in many cases, prevent the approval of new landfills or expansion of existing facilities.
Effects of Improper Waste Disposal and Unauthorized Releases
Before the passage of environmental regulations, wastes were disposed of improperly without considering the potential effects on public health and the environment. This practice has led to numerous contaminated sites where soils and groundwater have been contaminated and pose a risk to public safety. Of more than 36,000 environmentally impacted candidate sites, more than 1,400 sites are listed under the Superfund program National Priority List (NPL) that require immediate cleanup resulting from acute, imminent threats to environmental and human health. The USEPA identified about 2,500 additional contaminated sites that eventually require remediation. The United States Department of Defense maintains 19,000 sites, many of which have been extensively contaminated from various uses and disposal practices. Further, approximately 400,000 underground storage tanks have been confirmed or are suspected of leaking, contaminating underlying soils and groundwater. Over $10 billion (more than $25 billion in current dollars) were specifically allocated by CERCLA and subsequent amendments to mitigate impacted sites. However, the USEPA has estimated that the value of environmental remediation exceeds $100 billion. Alarmingly, if past expenditures on NPL sites are extrapolated across remaining and proposed NPL sites, this total may be significantly higher – well into the trillions of dollars.
It is estimated that more than 4,700 facilities in the United States currently treat, store, or dispose of hazardous wastes. About 3,700 facilities that house approximately 64,000 solid waste management units (SWMUs) may require corrective action. Accidental spillage of hazardous wastes and nuclear materials due to anthropogenic operations or natural disasters has also caused enormous environmental damage, as evidenced by the events such as the facility failure in Chornobyl, Ukraine (formerly USSR) in 1986, the effects of Hurricane Katrina that devastated New Orleans, Louisiana in 2005, and the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami in Fukushima, Japan.
Adverse Impacts on Public Health
Various chemicals are present within waste materials, many of which pose a significant environmental concern. Though the leachate generated from the wastes may contain toxic chemicals, the concentrations and variety of toxic chemicals are quite small compared to hazardous waste sites. For example, explosives and radioactive wastes are primarily located at Department of Energy (DOE) sites because many facilities have historically been used for weapons research, fabrication, testing, and training. Organic contaminants are largely found at oil refineries or petroleum storage sites, and inorganic and pesticide contamination usually results from various industrial and agricultural activities. Yet, soil and groundwater contamination is not the only direct adverse effect of improper waste management activities – recent studies have also shown that greenhouse gas emissions from the wastes are significant, exacerbating global climate change.
A wide range of toxic chemicals, with an equally wide distribution of respective concentrations, is found in waste streams. These compounds may be present in concentrations that alone may threaten human health or have a synergistic/cumulative effect due to the presence of other compounds. Exposure to hazardous wastes has been linked to many types of cancer, chronic illnesses, and abnormal reproductive outcomes such as birth defects, low birth weights, and spontaneous abortions. Many studies have been performed on major toxic chemicals found at hazardous waste sites incorporating epidemiological or animal tests to determine their toxic effects.
As an example, the effects of radioactive materials are classified as somatic or genetic. The somatic effects may be immediate or occur over a long period of time. Immediate effects from large radiation doses often produce nausea and vomiting and may be followed by severe blood changes, hemorrhage, infection, and death. Delayed effects include leukemia and many types of cancer, including bone, lung, and breast. Genetic effects have been observed in which gene mutations or chromosome abnormalities result in measurable harmful effects, such as decreased life expectancy, increased susceptibility to sickness or disease, infertility, or even death during embryonic stages. Because of these studies, occupational dosage limits have been recommended by the National Council on Radiation Protection. Similar studies have been completed for a wide range of potentially hazardous materials. These studies have, in turn, been used to determine safe exposure levels for numerous exposure scenarios, including those that consider occupational safety and remediation standards for various land use scenarios, including residential, commercial, and industrial land uses.
Adverse Impacts on the Environment
The chemicals found in waste pose a threat to human health and have profound effects on entire ecosystems. Contaminants may change the chemistry of waters and destroy aquatic life and underwater ecosystems dependent upon more complex species. Contaminants may also enter the food chain through plants or microbiological organisms, and higher, more evolved organisms bioaccumulate the wastes through subsequent ingestion. The continued bioaccumulation results in increased contaminant mass and concentration as the contaminants move farther up the food chain. In many cases, toxic concentrations are reached, resulting in increased mortality of one or more species. As the populations of these species decrease, the natural inter-species balance is affected. With decreased numbers of predators or food sources, other species may be drastically affected, leading to a chain reaction that can affect a wide range of flora and fauna within a specific ecosystem. As the ecosystem continues to deviate from equilibrium, disastrous consequences may occur. Examples include the near extinction of the bald eagle due to persistent ingestion of DDT-impacted fish and the depletion of oysters, crabs, and fish in the Chesapeake Bay due to excessive quantities of fertilizers, toxic chemicals, farm manure wastes, and power plant emissions.
Waste Management
The long-recognized hierarchy of management of wastes, in order of preference, consists of prevention, minimization, recycling and reuse, biological treatment, incineration, and landfill disposal (see Figure 1 below).
Waste Prevention
The ideal waste management alternative is to prevent waste generation in the first place. Hence, waste prevention is a basic goal of all waste management strategies. Numerous technologies can be employed throughout the manufacturing, use, or post-use portions of product life cycles to eliminate waste and, in turn, reduce or prevent pollution. Some representative strategies include environmentally conscious manufacturing methods that incorporate less hazardous or harmful materials, the use of modern leakage detection systems for material storage, innovative chemical neutralization techniques to reduce reactivity or water-saving technologies that reduce the need for freshwater inputs.
Waste Minimization
In many cases, wastes cannot be outright eliminated from a variety of processes. However, numerous strategies can be implemented to reduce or minimize waste generation. Waste minimization, or source reduction, refers to the collective strategies of design and fabrication of products or services that minimize the amount of generated waste and/or reduce the toxicity of the resultant waste. Often these efforts come about from identified trends or specific products that may be causing problems in the waste stream and the subsequent steps taken to halt these problems. In industry, waste can be reduced by reusing materials, using less hazardous substitute materials, or modifying components of design and processing. Many benefits can be realized by waste minimization or source reduction, including reduced use of natural resources and the reduction of toxicity of wastes.
Waste minimization strategies are extremely common in manufacturing applications; the savings of material use preserves resources but also saves significant manufacturing-related costs. Advancements in streamlined packaging reduce material use, and increased distribution efficiency reduces fuel consumption and resulting air emissions. Further, engineered building materials can often be designed with specific favorable properties that, when accounted for in an overall structural design, can greatly reduce the overall mass and weight of material needed for a given structure. This reduces the need for excess material and reduces the waste associated with component fabrication.
The dry cleaning industry provides an excellent example of product substitution to reduce toxic waste generation. For decades, dry cleaners used tetrachloroethylene, or “perc” as a dry cleaning solvent. Although effective, tetrachloroethylene is a relatively toxic compound. Additionally, it is easily introduced into the environment, where it is highly recalcitrant due to its physical properties. Further, when its degradation occurs, the intermediate daughter products generated are more toxic to human health and the environment.
Because of its toxicity and impact on the environment, the dry cleaning industry has adopted new practices and increasingly utilizes less toxic replacement products, including petroleum-based compounds. Further, new emerging technologies are incorporating carbon dioxide and other relatively harmless compounds. While these substitute products have in many cases been mandated by government regulation, they have also been adopted in response to consumer demands and other market-based forces.
Recycling and Reuse
Recycling refers to the recovery of useful materials such as glass, paper, plastics, wood, and metals from the waste stream so they may be incorporated into the fabrication of new products. With the greater incorporation of recycled materials, the required use of raw materials for identical applications is reduced. Recycling reduces the need for natural resource exploitation for raw materials, but it also allows waste materials to be recovered and utilized as valuable resource materials. Recycling of wastes directly conserves natural resources, reduces energy consumption and emissions generated by the extraction of virgin materials and their subsequent manufacture into finished products, reduces overall energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global climate change, and reduces the incineration or landfilling of the materials that have been recycled. Moreover, recycling creates several economic benefits, including the potential to create job markets and drive growth.
Commonly recycled materials include paper, plastics, glass, aluminum, steel, and wood. Additionally, many construction materials can be reused, including concrete, asphalt materials, masonry, and reinforcing steel. “Green” plant-based wastes are often recovered and immediately reused for mulch or fertilizer applications. Many industries also recover various by-products and/or refine and “re-generate” solvents for reuse. Examples include copper and nickel recovery from metal finishing processes; the recovery of oils, fats, and plasticizers by solvent extraction from filter media such as activated carbon and clays; and acid recovery by spray roasting, ion exchange, or crystallization. Further, a range of used food-based oils are being recovered and utilized in “biodiesel” applications.
Numerous examples of successful recycling and reuse efforts are encountered every day. In some cases, recycled materials are used as input materials and are heavily processed into end products. Common examples include the use of scrap paper for new paper manufacturing or the processing of old aluminum cans into new aluminum products. In other cases, reclaimed materials undergo little or no processing prior to their re-use.
Some common examples include the use of tree waste as wood chips or the use of brick and other fixtures in new structural construction. In any case, the success of recycling depends on the effective collection and processing of recyclables, markets for reuse (e.g. manufacturing and/or applications that utilize recycled materials), and public acceptance and promotion of recycled products and applications utilizing recycled materials.
Biological Treatment
Landfill disposal of wastes containing significant organic fractions is increasingly discouraged in many countries, including the United States. Such disposal practices are even prohibited in several European countries. Since landfilling does not provide an attractive management option, other techniques have been identified. One option is to treat waste so that biodegradable materials are degraded and the remaining inorganic waste fraction (known as residuals) can be subsequently disposed of or used for a beneficial purpose.
Biodegradation of wastes can be accomplished by using aerobic composting, anaerobic digestion, or mechanical biological treatment (MBT) methods. If the organic fraction can be separated from inorganic material, aerobic composting or anaerobic digestion can be used to degrade the waste and convert it into usable compost. For example, organic wastes such as food waste, yard waste, and animal manure that consist of naturally degrading bacteria can be converted under controlled conditions into compost, which can then be utilized as a natural fertilizer. Aerobic composting is accomplished by placing selected proportions of organic waste into piles, rows, or vessels, either in open conditions or within closed buildings fitted with gas collection and treatment systems. During the process, bulking agents such as wood chips are added to the waste material to enhance the aerobic degradation of organic materials. Finally, the material is allowed to stabilize and mature during a curing process where pathogens are concurrently destroyed. The end products of the composting process include carbon dioxide, water, and usable compost material.
Compost material may be used in a variety of applications. In addition to its use as a soil amendment for plant cultivation, compost can be used remediate soils, groundwater, and storm water. Composting can be labor-intensive, and the quality of the compost is heavily dependent on proper control of the composting process. Inadequate control of the operating conditions can result in compost that is unsuitable for beneficial applications. Nevertheless, composting is becoming increasingly popular; composting diverted 82 million tons of waste material away from the landfill waste stream in 2009, increasing from 15 million tons in 1980. This diversion also prevented the release of approximately 178 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2009 – an amount equivalent to the yearly carbon dioxide emissions of 33 million automobiles.
In some cases, aerobic processes are not feasible. As an alternative, anaerobic processes may be utilized. Anaerobic digestion consists of degrading mixed or sorted organic wastes in vessels under anaerobic conditions. The anaerobic degradation process produces a combination of methane and carbon dioxide (biogas) and residuals (biosolids). Biogas can be used for heating and electricity production, while residuals can be used as fertilizers and soil amendments. Anaerobic digestion is a preferred degradation for wet wastes as compared to the preference of composting for dry wastes. The advantage of anaerobic digestion is biogas collection; this collection and subsequent beneficial utilization make it a preferred alternative to landfill disposal of wastes. Also, waste is degraded faster through anaerobic digestion as compared to landfill disposal.
Another waste treatment alternative, mechanical biological treatment (MBT), is not common in the United States. However, this alternative is widely used in Europe. During the implementation of this method, waste material is subjected to a combination of mechanical and biological operations that reduce volume through the degradation of organic fractions in the waste. Mechanical operations such as sorting, shredding, and crushing prepare the waste for subsequent biological treatment, consisting of either aerobic composting or anaerobic digestion. Following the biological processes, the reduced waste mass may be subjected to incineration.
Incineration
Waste degradation not only produces useful solid end-products (such as compost), but degradation by-products can also be used as a beneficial energy source. As discussed above, anaerobic digestion of waste can generate biogas, which can be captured and incorporated into electricity generation. Alternatively, waste can be directly incinerated to produce energy. Incineration consists of waste combustion at very high temperatures to produce electrical energy. The byproduct of incineration is ash, which requires proper characterization prior to disposal, or in some cases, beneficial re-use. It is widely used in developed countries due to landfill space limitations. It is estimated that about 130 million tons of waste are annually combusted in more than 600 plants in 35 countries. Further, incineration is often used to effectively mitigate hazardous wastes such as chlorinated hydrocarbons, oils, solvents, medical wastes, and pesticides.
| Pros of Incinerators | Cons of Incinerators |
| The incinerated waste is turned into energy | The fly ash (airborne particles) has high levels of toxic chemicals, including dioxin, cadmium, and lead. |
| The volume of waste is reduced. | The initial construction costs are high. |
Despite the advantages, incineration is often viewed negatively because of high initial construction costs, and emissions of ash, which is toxic (see Table above). Currently, many ‘next generation” systems are being researched and developed, and the USEPA is developing new regulations to carefully monitor incinerator air emissions under the Clean Air Act.
Landfill Disposal
Despite advances in reuse and recycling, landfill disposal remains the primary waste disposal method in the United States. As previously mentioned, the rate of MSW generation continues to increase, but overall landfill capacity is decreasing. New regulations concerning proper waste disposal and the use of innovative liner systems to minimize the potential of groundwater contamination from leachate infiltration and migration have resulted in a substantial increase in the costs of landfill disposal. Also, public opposition to landfills continues to grow, partially inspired by memories of historic uncontrolled dumping practices and the resulting undesirable side effects of uncontrolled vectors, contaminated groundwater, unmitigated odors, and subsequent diminished property values.
Landfills can be designed and permitted to accept hazardous wastes in accordance with RCRA Subtitle C regulations, or they may be designed and permitted to accept municipal solid waste in accordance with RCRA Subtitle D regulations. Regardless of their waste designation, landfills are engineered structures consisting of bottom and side liner systems, leachate collection and removal systems, final cover systems, gas collection and removal systems, and groundwater monitoring systems. An extensive permitting process is required for siting, designing, and operating landfills. Post-closure monitoring of landfills is also typically required for at least 30 years. Because of their design, wastes within landfills are degraded anaerobically. During degradation, biogas is produced and collected. The collection systems prevent uncontrolled subsurface gas migration and reduce the potential for explosive conditions. The captured gas is often used in cogeneration facilities for heating or electricity generation. Further, upon closure, many landfills undergo “land recycling” and are redeveloped as golf courses, recreational parks, and other beneficial uses. Wastes commonly exist in dry conditions within landfills, and as a result, the rate of waste degradation is commonly very slow. These slow degradation rates are coupled with slow rates of degradation-induced settlement, which can in turn complicate or reduce the potential for beneficial land re-use at the surface. Recently, the concept of bioreactor landfills has emerged, which involves the recirculation of leachate and/or injection of selected liquids to increase the moisture in the waste, which in turn induces rapid degradation. The increased rates of degradation increase the rate of biogas production, which increases the potential of beneficial energy production from biogas capture and utilization.
Regulatory Framework in the United States
During the course of the 20th century, especially following World War II, the United States experienced unprecedented economic growth. Much of the growth was fueled by rapid and increasingly complex industrialization. With advances in manufacturing and chemical applications also came increases in the volume and, in many cases, the toxicity of generated wastes. Furthermore, few, if any, controls or regulations were in place concerning the handling of toxic materials or the disposal of waste products. The continued industrial activity led to several high-profile examples of detrimental environmental consequences resulting from these uncontrolled activities. Finally, several forms of intervention, both in the form of government regulation and citizen action, occurred in the early 1970s. Ultimately, several regulations were promulgated on the state and federal levels to ensure the safety of public health and the environment. For waste materials, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), enacted by the United States Congress in 1976 and amended in 1984, provides a comprehensive framework for properly managing hazardous and non-hazardous solid wastes in the United States. RCRA stipulates broad and general legal objectives while mandating the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)to develop specific regulations to implement and enforce the law. States and local governments can either adopt the federal regulations or they may develop and enforce more stringent regulations than those specified in RCRA. Similar regulations have been developed or are being developed worldwide to manage waste similarly in other countries.
The broad goals of RCRA include (1) the protection of public health and the environment from the hazards of waste disposal; (2) the conservation of energy and natural resources; (3) the reduction or elimination of waste; and (4) the assurance that wastes are managed in an environmentally-sound manner (e.g., the remediation of waste which may have spilled, leaked, or been improperly disposed of). It should be noted here that the RCRA focuses only on active and future facilities and does not address abandoned or historical sites. These types of environmentally impacted sites are managed under a different regulatory framework, known as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980, more commonly known as “Superfund.”
Solid Waste Regulations
RCRA defines solid waste as any garbage or refuse, sludge from a wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility and other discarded material, including solid, liquid, semi-solid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, commercial, mining, and agricultural operations, and from community activities. In general, solid waste can be categorized as either non-hazardous waste or hazardous waste.
Non-hazardous solid waste can be trash or garbage generated from residential households, offices, and other sources. Generally, these materials are classified as municipal solid waste(MSW). Alternatively, industrial solid waste is collectively known as non-hazardous materials that result from producing goods and products by various industries (e.g., coal combustion residues, mining wastes, cement kiln dust). Because they are classified as non-hazardous materials, many municipal solid and industrial waste components have potential for recycling and reuse. Significant efforts are underway by both government agencies and industry to advance these objectives.
Hazardous waste generated by many industries and businesses (e.g., dry cleaners and auto repair shops) is constituted of materials that are dangerous or potentially harmful to human health and the environment. The EPA classifies waste as hazardous if it exhibits at least one of these four characteristics:
- Ignitability refers to the creation of fires under certain conditions, including spontaneously combustible materials or those with a flash point less than 140 F.
- Corrosivity refers to the capability to corrode metal containers, including materials with a pH less than or equal to 2 or greater than or equal to 12.5.
- Reactivity refers to materials susceptible to unstable conditions such as explosions, toxic fumes, gases, or vapors when heated, compressed, or mixed with water under normal conditions.
- Toxicity is substances that can induce harmful or fatal effects when ingested, absorbed, or inhaled.
As required by RCRA, the EPA established a cradle-to-grave hazardous material management system in an attempt to track hazardous material or waste from its point of generation to its ultimate point of disposal, where the generators of hazardous materials have to attach a “manifest” form to their hazardous materials shipments. The management of hazardous wastes including the transport, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous wastes is regulated under the RCRA. For hazardous wastes disposal, this procedure will result in the shipment and arrival of those wastes at a permitted disposal site. The RCRA also promotes the concept of resource recovery to decrease the generation of waste materials.
Hazardous waste management facilities receiving hazardous wastes for treatment, storage or disposal are referred to as treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs). The EPA closely regulates the TSDFs so that they operate properly for protection of human health and the environment. TSDFs may be owned and operated by independent companies that receive wastes from a number of waste generators, or by the generators of waste themselves. TSDFs include landfills, incinerators, impoundments, holding tanks, and many other treatment units designed for safe and efficient management of hazardous waste. The EPA closely regulates the construction and operation of these TSDFs, where the operators of TSDFs must obtain a permit from the EPA delineating the procedures for the operation of these facilities. The operators must also provide insurance and adequate financial backing. The shipping of wastes to a TSDF or recycler is frequently less expensive than obtaining and meeting all the requirements for a storage permit.
The major amendment to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act was instituted in 1984 as the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA). The HSWA provides regulation for leaking underground storage tanks (leaking USTs) affecting groundwater pollution. The RCRA regulates USTs containing hazardous wastes. In addition, the HSWA provides for regulation to prevent the contamination of groundwater by hazardous wastes, where the EPA restricts the disposal of hazardous wastes in landfills due to the migration of hazardous constituents from the waste placed in landfills.
Radioactive Hazardous Wastes
Although non-hazardous waste and hazardous waste are regulated by RCRA, nuclear or radioactive waste is regulated under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the United States.
Radioactive wastes are characterized according to four categories: (1) High-level waste (HLW), (2) Transuranic waste (TRU), (3) Low-level waste (LLW), and (4) Mill tailings. Various radioactive wastes decay at different rates, but health and environmental dangers due to radiation may persist for hundreds or thousands of years.
High-level waste is typically liquid or solid waste resulting from government defense-related activities, nuclear power plants, and spent fuel assemblies. These wastes are extremely dangerous due to their heavy concentrations of radionuclides, and humans must not come into contact with them.
Transuranic waste mainly results from reprocessing spent nuclear fuels and the fabrication of nuclear weapons for defense projects. They are characterized by moderately penetrating radiation and a decay time of approximately twenty years until safe radionuclide levels are achieved. Following the passage of a reprocessing ban in 1977, most of this waste generation ended. Even though the ban was lifted in 1981, Transuranic waste remains rare because reprocessing nuclear fuel is expensive. Further, political and social pressures minimize these activities because the extracted plutonium may be used to manufacture nuclear weapons.
Low-level wastes include much of the remainder of radioactive waste materials. They constitute over 80 percent of the volume of all nuclear wastes but only about two percent of total radioactivity. Low-level waste includes all of the previously cited sources of High-level waste and Transuranic waste, plus wastes generated by hospitals, industrial plants, universities, and commercial laboratories. Low-level waste is much less dangerous than High-level waste, and NRC regulations allow some very low-level wastes to be released into the environment. Low-level wastes may also be stored or buried until the isotopes decay to low enough so they may be disposed of as non-hazardous waste. Low-level waste disposal is managed at the state level, but the USEPA and NRC establish requirements for operation and disposal. The Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) is responsible for setting the standards for workers exposed to radioactive materials.
International Regulatory Framework
The 1992 Basel Convention
The Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal first came into force in 1992. The Convention puts an onus on exporting countries to ensure that hazardous wastes are managed in an environmentally sound manner in the country of import. The Basel Convention places obligations on countries that are party to the Convention. 151 Countries have ratified the Basel Convention as of December 2002. These have obligations to:
- Minimize generations of hazardous waste;
- Ensure adequate disposal facilities are available;
- Control and reduce international movements of hazardous waste;
- Ensure environmentally sound management of waste; and
- Prevent and punish illegal traffic.
The 1995 Waigani Convention
The Basel Convention establishes a global control system for shipping hazardous waste from one country to another. States that are Parties to the Convention must not trade hazardous wastes with non-Parties. Still, an exception to this is provided for in Article 11 of the Convention, whereby Parties may enter into agreements or arrangements with other Parties or non-Parties.
These agreements or arrangements can also set out controls different from those prescribed by the Convention itself, provided such controls do not reduce the level of environmental protection intended by the Convention.
The Waigani Convention is to ban the importation of hazardous and radioactive wastes into Forum Island Countries and to control the transboundary movement and management of hazardous wastes within the South Pacific Region. This agreement was enforced in October 2001. The Convention also enables Australia to receive hazardous wastes exported from South Pacific Forum Island countries that are not Parties to the Basel Convention. There are 24 countries within the coverage area of the Waigani Convention. As of December 2002, ten parties had ratified the Waigani Convention. These were Australia, the Cook Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, and Vanuatu.
Electronic Waste
Electronic waste, commonly known as e-waste, refers to discarded electronic products such as televisions, computers and computer peripherals (e.g., monitors, keyboards, disk drives, and printers), telephones and cellular phones, audio and video equipment, video cameras, fax and copy machines, video game consoles, and others (see Figure 1 below).
In the United States, it is estimated that about 3 million tons of e-waste are generated each year. This waste quantity includes approximately 27 million units of televisions, 205 million units of computer products, and 140 million units of cell phones. Less than 15 to 20 percent of the e-waste is recycled or refurbished; the remaining percentage is commonly disposed of in landfills and/or incinerated. It should be noted that e-waste constitutes less than 4 percent of total solid waste generated in the United States. However, with tremendous growth in technological advancements in the electronics industry, many electronic products are becoming obsolete quickly, thus increasing the production of e-waste very rapidly. The quantities of e-waste generated are also increasing rapidly in other countries, such as India and China, due to the high demand for computers and cell phones.
In addition to the growing quantity of e-waste, the hazardous content of e-waste is a major environmental concern. It poses risks to the environment if these wastes are improperly managed once they have reached the end of their useful life. Many e-waste components contain toxic substances, including heavy metals such as lead, copper, zinc, cadmium, and mercury, and organic contaminants, such as flame retardants (polybrominated biphenyls and polybrominated diphenyl ethers). Releasing these substances into the environment and subsequent human exposure can lead to serious health and pollution issues. Concerns have also been raised regarding releasing toxic constituents of e-waste into the environment if landfilling and/or incineration options are used to manage the e-waste.
Various regulatory and voluntary programs have been instituted to promote the reuse, recycling, and safe disposal of bulk e-waste. Reuse and refurbishing has been promoted to reduce raw material use, energy consumption, and water consumption associated with manufacturing new products. Recycling and recovering elements such as lead, copper, gold, silver, and platinum can yield valuable resources that may cause pollution if improperly released into the environment. The recycling and recovery operations have to be conducted with extreme care, as the exposure of e-waste components can result in adverse health impacts on the workers performing these operations. For economic reasons, recycled e-waste is often exported to other countries for recovery operations. However, lax regulatory environments in many of these countries can lead to unsafe practices or improper disposal of bulk residual e-waste, adversely affecting vulnerable populations.
There are no specific federal laws dealing with e-waste in the United States, but many states have recently developed e-waste regulations that promote environmentally sound management. For example, California passed the Electronic Waste Recycling Act in 2003 to foster recycling, reuse, and environmentally sound disposal of residual bulk e-waste. Yet, despite recent regulations and advances in reuse, recycling, and proper disposal practices, additional sustainable strategies to manage e-waste are urgently needed.
One sustainable strategy used to manage e-waste is extended producer responsibility (EPR), also known as product stewardship. This concept holds manufacturers liable for the entire life-cycle costs associated with the electronic products, including disposal costs, and encourages the use of environmental-friendly manufacturing processes and products. Manufacturers can pursue EPR in multiple ways, including reuse/refurbishing, buy-back recycling, and energy production or beneficial reuse applications. Life-cycle assessment and cost methodologies may be used to compare the environmental impacts of these different waste management options. Incentives or financial support are also provided by some government and/or regulatory agencies to promote EPR. Using non-toxic and easily recyclable materials in product fabrication is a major component of any EPR strategy. A growing number of companies (e.g., Dell, Sony, HP) are embracing EPR with various initiatives toward achieving sustainable e-waste management.
EPR is a preferred strategy because the manufacturer bears financial and legal responsibility for their products; hence, they are incentivized to incorporate green design and manufacturing practices that incorporate easily recyclable and less toxic material components while producing electronics with longer product lives. One obvious disadvantage of EPR is the higher manufacturing cost, which leads to increased costs of electronics to consumers.
There is no specific federal law requiring EPR for electronics. Still, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) undertook several initiatives to promote EPR to achieve the following goals: (1) foster environmentally conscious design and manufacturing, (2) increase purchasing and use of more environmentally sustainable electronics, and (3) increase safe, environmentally sound reuse and recycling of used electronics. To achieve these goals, USEPA has been engaged in various activities, including the promotion of environmental considerations in product design, the development of evaluation tools for environmental attributes of electronic products, the encouragement of recycling (or ecycling), and the support of programs to reduce e-waste, among others. More than 20 states in the United States and various organizations worldwide have already developed laws and/or policies requiring EPR in some form when dealing with electronic products. For instance, the New York State Wireless Recycling Act emphasizes that authorized retailers and service providers should be compelled to participate in take-back programs, thus allowing increased recycling and reuse of e-waste. Similarly, Maine is the first U.S. state to adopt a household e-waste law with EPR.
In Illinois, Electronic Products Recycling & Reuse Act requires electronic manufacturers to participate in managing discarded and unwanted electronic products from residences. The Illinois EPA has also compiled e-waste collection site locations where the residents can give away their discarded electronic products at no charge. Furthermore, USEPA compiled a list of local programs and manufacturers/retailers that can help consumers properly donate or recycle e-waste.
On January 9, 2017, Governor Christie of New Jersey signed legislation that revised certain requirements of the State’s electronic waste management program under the “Electronic Waste Management Act ” (https://www.nj.gov/dep/dshw/ewaste/legislation.html). New Jersey consumers and small businesses with fewer than 50 full-time employees, can recycle for free at the approved manufacturers collection sites. All computers, monitors, laptops, portable computers, desktop printers, desktop fax machines and televisions are accepted for free recycling. Each manufacturer must ensure to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) that electronic devices are recycled in a manner that is in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances. Manufacturers must also ensure that these devices are not exported for disposal in a manner that poses a risk to the public health or the environment.
Overall, the growing quantities and environmental hazards associated with electronic waste are of major concern to waste management professionals worldwide. Current management strategies, including recycling and refurbishing, have not been successful. As a result, EPR regulations are rapidly evolving worldwide to promote sustainable e-waste management. However, neither a consistent framework nor assessment tools to evaluate EPR have been fully developed.
Marine Debris
What is Marine Debris?
Our oceans are filled with items that do not belong there. Huge amounts of plastics, metals, rubber, paper, textiles, derelict fishing gear, derelict vessels, and other lost or discarded items enter the marine environment every day. This makes marine debris one of the most widespread pollution problems facing the world’s ocean and waterways.
Marine debris is defined as any persistent solid material that is manufactured or processed and directly or indirectly, intentionally or unintentionally, disposed of or abandoned into the marine environment or the Great Lakes. Anything human-made and solid can become marine debris once lost or littered in these aquatic environments. Our trash has been found in every corner of our ocean, from the most remote shorelines, to ice in the Arctic, and even the deepest parts of the sea floor.
Some of the most common and harmful types of marine debris include plastic, such as cigarette butts, plastic bags, and food wrappers, and derelict fishing gear. Marine debris can also range greatly in size from the smallest plastic pieces, called microplastics, that can be too small to be seen with the human eye, to huge abandoned and derelict vessels, construction debris, and household appliances that can damage sensitive habitats. Although some of these items may eventually break down, others are made to last a long time. Once they are in the environment, these items may never fully go away.
It’s most important to remember that marine debris is preventable. This global problem is caused by people, and we can also be the solution. The NOAA Marine Debris Program funds projects across the United States and territories that remove marine debris from shorelines, research the issue to better understand the problem, and prevent it from entering the ocean in the first place.
You can make a difference too! Learn how you can help take on marine debris, no matter where you are.
How much marine debris is in the ocean and Great Lakes?
Marine debris is a large and global problem, and it can be very difficult to say how much enters the ocean and Great Lakes. Once marine debris is in the ocean, it can be challenging to understand where it came from, where it goes, or how much is there.
A study by Borrelle et al.(link is external) estimated that in 2016, as much as 23 million metric tons of plastic waste entered aquatic ecosystems from land around the world. This number may feel huge, but it’s not the whole picture. It doesn’t include marine debris items not made of plastic, or ocean-based marine debris, such as lost fishing gear and vessels.
If you think about an overflowing sink, the first step before cleaning up the water is to turn the faucet off. By preventing plastic marine debris, we can turn the faucet off and keep this problem from growing. The NOAA Marine Debris Program supports projects that prevent marine debris from ever entering our ocean and waterways through outreach and education efforts that raise awareness of the issue and change behaviors related to common marine debris items.
There is not a ‘one-size fits all’ solution to the problem, and cleaning up marine debris is also important. The NOAA Marine Debris Program also supports community-based marine debris removal projects across the United States. From local shoreline cleanups to vessel removals, these projects benefit coastal habitats, waterways, and wildlife. Since 2006, the NOAA Marine Debris Program has supported over 160 marine debris removal projects and removed more than 22,500 metric tons of marine debris from our coasts and ocean.
Plastic
Many wastes, such as high-level radioactive wastes, will remain dangerous for thousands of years, and even MSW can produce dangerous leachate that could devastate an entire ecosystem if allowed to infiltrate into and migrate within groundwater. Environmental professionals must deal with problems associated with increased generation of waste materials to protect human health and the environment. The solution must focus on reducing the sources of waste and the safe disposal of waste. It is, therefore, extremely important to know the waste’s sources, classifications, chemical compositions, and physical characteristics and understand the strategies for managing them. Waste management practices vary not only from country to country but also based on the type and composition of waste. Regardless of the geographical setting of the type of waste that needs to be managed, resource conservation is the governing principle in developing any waste management plan. Natural resource and energy conservation are achieved by managing materials more efficiently. Reduction, reuse, and recycling are primary strategies for effectively reducing waste quantities. Further, proper waste management decisions have increasing importance, as the consequences of these decisions have broader implications concerning greenhouse gas emissions and global climate change. As a result, several public and private partnership programs are under development with the goal of reducing waste by adopting new and innovative waste management technologies. Because waste is an inevitable by-product of civilization, successfully implementing these initiatives will directly affect societies’ enhanced quality of life worldwide.
Resources – Links
Attributes
This chapter is composed of text taken from the following sources:
Introduction to Environmental Sciences and Sustainability Chapter 12: Solid and Hazardous Waste by Emily P. Harris is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted. https://pressbooks.uwf.edu/envrioscience/
Sustainability – A Comprehensive Foundation (Cabezas) is shared under a CC BY license and was authored, remixed, and/or curated by Heriberto Cabezas (GALILEO Open Learning Materials) .
Plastic Waste Legislation. NJ S2776 https://www.billtrack50.com/BillDetail/988016
NOAA Marine Debris Program. Plastic. https://marinedebris.noaa.gov/what-marine-debris/plastic
NOAA What are microplastics. https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/microplastics.html.
e-Waste Regulations in NJ. https://www.nj.gov/dep/dshw/ewaste/index