TRP Chapter 5.4 1
Chapter 5.4Facility development
TRP Chapter 5.4 2
Components of an integrated hazardous waste management strategy
ENFORCEMENT
LEGISLATION
SUPPORTSERVICES
FACILITIES
Institutional arrangements
Stakeholders
Source: David C Wilson 1993, 1999
TRP Chapter 5.4 3
The implementation conundrum
Source: David C Wilson
TRP Chapter 5.4 4
Waste hierarchy
Source: David C Wilson 1993, 1997, 2001
TRP Chapter 5.4 5
Short term vs long term solutions
•Need twin track approach: •In the short term: ‘do something now’ •For the long term, need strategic planning
•Landfill will continue to be needed
Example of long term, strategic approach: Hong Kong •1981 Planning study for central treatment facility for hazardous wastes, and site selected
•1987 Detailed feasibility study commenced •1990 Contractor appointed •1993 Facility began operationIntermediate treatment for hazardous wastes included: •co-disposal of selected wastes in controlled landfills•export of small quantities of difficult wastes (eg PCB capacitors) for high temperature incineration in Europe
TRP Chapter 5.4 6
Information needed for facility development
For short, medium and long term, need information on:
•current waste quantities and types
•location of generators
•forecasts of likely future arisings
TRP Chapter 5.4 7
On-site solutions
On-site handling is the preferred solution, where possible
Depends on:
• waste type, generation rate and frequency
• framework of government policy
• technical feasibility of small-scale plant
• company’s level of competence
• economic feasibility
• risks eg accidents
TRP Chapter 5.4 8
Some common on-site treatment options
The following may be found at generators’ premises:
•wastewater treatment
•chemical treatment for hazard reduction
•recovery/recycling of solvents
•medium temperature incineration
•storage
•immobilisation
•licensed landfill (at very large premises)
TRP Chapter 5.4 9
Off-site solutions•high environmental standards•economies of scale •part of essential infrastructure
Small facilities - benefits•less transport•more flexible•lower capital costs Small facilities - disadvantages •more difficult to control •suited to private ownership
Large facilities - benefits •better operational/management standards•more reliable
Large facilities - disadvantages •more transport •less flexible eg for small loads•may be unsuited to initial stages•high capital costs
Large vs small
Phased programme - focus first on the bulk waste streams - cheaper and simpler to deal with - reduces the scale of problem and size of investment needed
TRP Chapter 5.4 10
Some common off-site treatment options
• Destruction of miscellaneous hazardous wastes eg from laboratories, schools and small generaotrs including households
• High temperature incineration of liquid and/or solid wastes
• Effluent treatment for small generators
• Stabilisation and immobilisation
• Solvent recycling
• Waste oil recovery
• Landfill for stabilised hazardous waste
TRP Chapter 5.4 11
Attracting investment in hazardous waste facilities
Requires a partnership between a number of players:
•Government
•Industry
•Private sector
•Financial institutions
•The public eg ngos
TRP Chapter 5.4 12
Government must provide control
Why are controls needed?
• To establish performance standards
• To determine permitted releases
• To ensure uniform standards for all operators including on-site facilities and create a ‘level playing field’
BUT - must co-ordinate introduction of controls with availability of facilities
AND must develop controls gradually, over time
TRP Chapter 5.4 13
Creating the right climate for investment
Government is responsible for creating right climate
Actions to encourage and support investment:
•Require generators to use new facility
•Ensure institutional clarity
•Encourage facility use
•Protect the business
•Provide financial support
•Provide assistance with finding a site
TRP Chapter 5.4 14
Ownership / funding models
Alternatives:• 100% government funded
• 100% private sector funded
• Mix of the two
• joint venture of central and local government and local industry
• partnerships eg municipality and waste industry
TRP Chapter 5.4 15
Balancing the needs of the joint venture partners
Need to balance:
• needs of facility proponent
• needs of government
• needs of local industry
TRP Chapter 5.4 16
Engaging the public
Siting and developing a facility is more likely to be successful if the public has already been involved at strategic level
Avoids pulling in opposite directions
TRP Chapter 5.4 17
A step-wise approach:
Bangkok case study
Treatment plant and storage sumps
Source: David C Wilson
TRP Chapter 5.4 18
Key lessons for addressing the implementation conundrum
• No easy answers
• Requires a mix of on-site and off-site facilities
• Progress step by step, consider transitional technologies, phase investments
• Government has key role, particularly in squeezing out wastes
• Successful implementation requires a proactive partnership
• The initial investor will require some protection of his market and some early financial support
TRP Chapter 5.4 19
Chapter 5.4 Summary
To implement an integrated waste management system, facility development is an essential component
Without facilities, regulations cannot be enforced
There are:
•Short term and long term solutions
•On-site and off-site solutions
Need to:
•Attract investment
•Engage the public
•Develop facilities in stages