Capitol Reef National Park

Waste Disposal --A Problem in 3 Parts

1. Garbage2. Hazardous Waste3. Equity Issues: Environmental Justice?

Recycling and Re-Use

• Recycling– Refashions discarded materials

into something else• Rubber tires into asphalt• Pop bottles into

– fleece– park benches

– Energy savings may be considerable• 90% for aluminum

– Problems with complex materials• Plastic soda bottles

• Re-Use– Material is used for same

purpose– Most commonly industrial

• Solvents• Precursor chemicals

– vinyl chloride

http://www.ecologycenter.org/ptf/misconceptions.html

Recycling Plastics: 7 facts

1. Unlike aluminum or paper, plastics are not recycled to the same use.

2. Curbside collection may increase landfilling of plastics.

3. The ‘chasing arrows’ on the container are meaningless.

4. Packaging resins are not made from oil refinery wastes.

5. Plastic producers don’t pay to promote plastic recycling– they just pay for the ads saying

their plastic can be recycled6. Using plastic containers does not

conserve energy --re-useable containers are most energy-efficient

7. The choice is not between recycling and tossing in the garbage-• Use refillable containers• Use less packaging

• Buy in bulk• Re-use containers

http://www.ecologycenter.org/ptf/misconceptions.html

What is Hazardous Waste?

• Toxic• Inflammabl

e• Corrosive• Infectious

And Where Do We Dispose of It?

• Store it – In a secure landfill – On site

• Destroy it – By incineration

• Decontaminate it– Infectious waste

• Neutralize it – Corrosive waste

Valley of the Drums -- 23 acres in Bullitt County, KY

When I made this slide, regulations for “small quantity generators” could be found at http://www.greentruck.com/waste/1204.html

(1985 data)

HazWaste Legislation• CERCLA, 1980

– Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

– “Superfund”• 1280 sites

• TSCA, 1976– Toxic Substances

Control Act

• RCRA, 1976– Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act Superfund Sites: 2010 current proposed cleaned up

2014 Map of Superfund Sites

http://sites.nicholas.duke.edu/superfund/the-pollution-next-door/

(These sites currently accept hazwastes.)

Current Technology and Past Failures

• Facts:– Modern regulations were phased in after 1965– “Age of chemicals” began in 1945– Lots of chemicals were used - and disposed of - before 1965

• and even before 1945• Consequences

– Numerous unregulated sites contained hazardous wastes by 1965

– A few more were added before regulations became firm

NPL= Nat’l Priorities List

1.7 million people in Region V

Berkely Mine pit near Butte, MO: arguably the most toxic mine waste site in US

Berkeley Pit, Butte MT

• Former copper mine (Anaconda, Atlantic Richfield)• Operated 1955-1982• 1 mile by 1/2 mile• 1780’ deep - containing 900’ water @ pH 2.5

– As, Cd, Zn, H2SO4

– Cu @ 187 ppm -- can be mined.• After closure, pumps turned off. • Groundwater seeped in, is now within 150’ of natural water table.

• 1990s: Superfund site and tourist attraction– adjacent gift shop.– $2 admission fee for viewing platform.

International Waste Management

• Basel Convention, 1989– Transboundary movement of hazwastes

• Stockholm Convention, 1995– regulates international movement of POPs

– persistent and bioaccumulative chemicals– “dirty dozen”

• Rotterdam Convention, 1998– Regulates international movement of about 30 hazardous chemicals

• Each of these conventions continues to modify the list of chemicals and how they should be managed.

Constructing the Trenches

:

Covering the Trenches

What is a Secure Hazwaste Landfill?

Modern HazWaste Landfills in the U.S.

Chemical Waste Management (6)EnviroSafe Services (2)Laidlaw Environmental Services (7)MAX Environmental TechnologiesPeoria DisposalTexas EcologistsU. S. EcologyWaste Control SpecialistsWayne Disposal, Inc

9 Companies Run These 21 Hazwaste Landfills

Landfilling Alternatives: Incineration

• Advantages– Destroys waste– Minimizes landfilling – Can generate energy

• Co-incineration• Waste-to-energy

systems

• Disadvantages– Not suitable for all waste streams

• Wet wastes require fuel– Suitable wastes can also be recycled

• Paper• Polyethylene

– Effluents are gases• Hard to control• Widely dispersed

– Ash may be very toxic• Must be landfilled

– Burning generates additional toxicants• Dioxins

http://www.simonds-mfg.com/diagram.html

Hazardous Wastes:Possibilities for Recycling and Re-Use

• Recycling– Refashions discarded

materials into something else• Rubber tires into asphalt

– Energy savings may be considerable• 90% for aluminum

– Problems with complex materials• Waste streams are usually

complex– Liability issues

• Re-Use– Material is used for same

purpose– Most commonly industrial

• Solvents• Precursor chemicals

– vinyl chloride– Liability issues– Trade secrets– Processes often create

hazards

Recycling electronic waste from the US in Ghana, India and China

Garbage is international - and so are hazardous wastes

W Sahara

Angola

Somalia

Zimbabwe

Gabon

North Korea

Burma Laos

AfghanistanU.S.A.

Hazardous Waste3. Environmental Justice?

Paradigms of Government, Environmental Disputes

andEnvironmental Justice

The Language of Environmental Disputes: Paradigms of Government

1. The Scientific Manager• Assumptions

– There is a single common good.– Expertise is impartial and serves this common good.– Participatory democracy cannot deal with technological complexity.– It is always possible to distinguish political from technical decisions.– An educated public will recognize the common good and agree to it.

• Consequences– The managerial voice model of government

• Bring in the experts.• Make the decision.• An educated public will agree with you

– If they don’t they are ignorant or malicious.

Robert Moses

The Language of Environmental Disputes: Paradigms of Government

2. The Managerial or Pluralistic Voice– Economic paradigms became more important - 1930-1970

• Recognizes competing ‘public goods’– For HasWaste facilities

» Consumers, who want cheap goods» Manufacturers, who need to dispose of wastes» Residents affected by site

• Official expertise alone does not suffice• Controversy is appropriate

– Each ‘public’ » Acts in its enlightened self interest» Is well informed

– Civil debate leads to acceptable compromise

Common Elements of HazWaste Disputes

• Hazardous waste problems are typically– Identified by residents– Initially dismissed by authorities– Extremely acrimonious

• Every fact is disputed• Every action on either side is construed as malicious by opponents

• Residents– Are hostile to all authority

• (except the few who are unequivocally on their side)– Disbelieve all assurances

• Authorities– First dismiss the problem– Then minimize it– Accuse residents of

• Stupidity or ignorance• Greed • Attention-seeking

• Scientists are typically– On both sides of the issue– Dogmatic either way

HazWastes and Environmental Decisions

• A small group of people stand to lose everything

• Traditional environmental organizations are not interested

• ‘Ticky-tacky houses’• Resources are not equal• Love Canal residents vs

– City – State– Federal government

• Uncertainties• Magnitude of health effects• Safety of new sites• Effectiveness of clean-ups

LULUs and NIMBYs

• LULU– Locally unwanted land use

• NIMBY– Not in My Back Yard

• Grass-roots approach • Specific sites• ad hoc organizations

• Examples of LULUs– Yucca Flats– Incinerators– Secure landfills– Any landfill

– Day care centers– Wal-Mart– Highways

Siting Hazardous Waste Disposal in the Late 20th Century

• Wilsonville– Southern Illinois

• Kankakee incinerator

• Yucca Flats– 190 mi NW of Las Vegas– Near site of past nuclear

testing– Deposition to begin 1998

• Still not begun?

Yucca Flats

• 190 mi NW of Las Vegas• Near site of past nuclear testing• Deposition to begin 1998

– Still not begun?