Risks Associated with Waste Management Projects. Illustrate your essay with specific examples.

With the advancement of civilization and reckless use of natural resources human activities have created a profound impact on environment. However, one of the most pressing problems of today’s generation is managing waste which is created in this process. Depending upon the type of waste created, waste management projects need to tackle a range of associated risks. Some of the risks imposed are generic in nature and applicable to nearly all types of waste management projects. However, each specific project may inherit its own risk factors that may be more unique in nature depending upon the waste management technique that is used. In order to keep the risks under control the waste management sector is strictly regulated.
A broad appreciation of the regulations helps management to scope the risks to a certain extent. However, management needs to take into consideration a wide variety of risks in order to undertake waste management projects. This paper explores some of these risks that are associated with waste management projects. The paper discusses risks associated with waste under three categories namely environmental risks; social risks and economics risks. This paper addresses both generic and more specific kind of risks associated with waste management projects. The specific risks relate to the type of waste being handle and the technology being used.
In order to discuss the risks of waste management projects in detail, understanding of the basic concepts is essential. It is important at this stage to define as to what we mean by the term ‘waste’. There are various definitions available of ‘waste’ representing the range of complex issues associated with it. Based on the definition of OECD/Eurostat, waste refers to ‘materials that are not prime products (i.e. products produced for the market) for which the generator has no further use for own purpose of production, transformation or consumption, and which he discards, or intends or is required to discard. Wastes may be generated during the extraction of raw materials during the processing of raw materials to intermediate and final products, during the consumption of final products, and during any other human activity’ (EIONET, 2006). Therefore, economically speaking waste may be referred as the by-products of production process, which do not have any monetary value.
However, waste generated may actually cost people. This is because the generated waste also needs to be disposed off. As defined by the Basel Convention ‘Wastes are substances or objects, which are disposed of or are intended to be disposed of or are required to be disposed of by the provisions of national law’ (Basel Convention 1992). Waste can be broadly categorized under two headings; hazardous waste and non-hazardous waste. Hazardous waste is potentially toxic or of a dangerous nature to people or environment. These types of waste are strictly controlled by legislation with specific details of its management, transportation and disposal. Nevertheless, it should be noted that hazardous waste is a broad and generic term which can be used for a wide range of substances imposing different levels of risks (Environment Agency, 2007).
The Environment Agency has classified wastes under two categories which are controlled and non-controlled waste. Controlled waste includes healthcare waste, packaging waste, used tyres, waste batteries, waste electrical and electrical equipment. Non-controlled wastes also have legal requirements however; they are not controlled by the Environment Agency. Wastes under this category include agricultural wastes, mines and quarry waste, radioactive waste and explosive waste. Depending on the nature of waste, waste management projects are associated with a range of risk factors which needs to be taken into consideration by management.
It is now important to understand as to what we actually refer by the term ‘risk’. According to the project management literature, risk maybe defined as ‘External influences which may affect the progress or success of the project, but over which the project manager has no direct control’ (Government of Romania, 1998). Economically speaking, risk may also be defined as ‘Chances of loss that result from an investment’ (Begg et al, 2003). Again risk can also be defined as ‘Possibilities of loss or injury resulting from a condition or its treatment’ (Coms, 1999). ‘In risk management terms, risk identification entails listing at the early stage of a project most, if not all, of the potential areas where an undesired outcome may result’. (Lam, 1999). Thus, the nature of risks can vary and needs to be analysed at the very onset of the project. This paper will now explore risks particular to waste management projects under these three broad headings of economic, social and environmental risks.
The first type of risks that any development project worries about is usually financial risk. Financial risks in waste management projects can be avoided if the management is vigilant and aware of the related legislations. The types of financial risks imposed for waste management projects are discussed in the following paragraphs. Waste management projects can lead to financial liabilities. Financial liabilities should be avoided by having an in depth understanding of the rules and regulations. In order to exemplify this, the case of Materials recovery facilitates (MRF) can be taken. This is a process of waste recovery to convert waste to useful products. Thus, it aims to add value from waste. However, this process can also lead to additional liabilities. This is especially so with regards to the third party involvement. The third party to whom the recovered materials may be sold to may actually become the subject to Compensation and Liability Act mandated by the comprehensive environmental response. In such a situation, the person to whom the good was sold to is deemed to be the principle responsible person and accordingly be charged penalties to clean up (LGEAN, 2007).
It should be however noted, that sometimes the distinction between the different types of risks associated with a single type of waste management project may not always be well defined. Therefore, economical risks may be overlapping with social risks. This can be exemplified from the case of waste management project related to composting. Composting is a result of the natural breakdown of organic material which may be derived both from livings animals and plants. It is said to be nature’s own and oldest method of waste disposal (Waste Online, 2007).
However, a risk assessment exercise carried out by DEFRA outlines the kinds of risks that are posed as a result of composting. Generally speaking, composting is associated with health and safety risks. Thus, it falls under the general heading of social impacts. However, if allowed to continue, the risks may eventually evolve to become financial risks as well. This is because, without proper management of the type of waste taken into consideration, there is a risk of contaminating land which can eventually be a liability. The report prepared by DEFRA, explored the impact of compost prepared from such raw materials on cattle, sheep, pigs and other poultry. Crops grown with the help of such compost may possibly have an impact on humans as well who eat these crops. Thus, the food chain may also be contaminated. Although this is essentially a health and safety risk, it can cost the management to clean up. Thus, any contamination resulting from a waste management project can have far reaching consequences on health and safety and it is usually up to the management to compensate for such negative impacts (DEFRA, 2002).
Social risks associated with waste management projects can be varied. To a great extent this depends on the contextual factors within which it is practiced. The most common type of risks that need to be considered for waste management projects is related to health. Health risks can be classified under the social risks associated with waste management projects. The type of health risk imposed to a great extent depends on the type of waste handled in the project. To appreciate the risks involved some examples of different types of projects have been used here. The examples have been carefully chosen from a wide variety of countries from all over the world in relation to different types of waste management projects.
Waste collection has been historically a dangerous occupation in the United States. In developed countries like U.S. and some developing ones, municipal waste, which can be classified as solid waste, is collected by municipal authorities from homes by kerbside collection using purpose-built waste collection vehicles. Solid waste can be defined as ‘Non-liquid, non-soluble materials ranging from municipal garbage to industrial wastes that contain complex and sometimes hazardous substances’ (Australian Government, 2007). Within solid waste itself, different types of waste may be categorized like by material (paper, plastic, glass), by physical properties (combustible, compostable, recyclable), by origin (industrial, agricultural, domestic etc.) or by safety level (hazardous and non-hazardous) (White et al, 1995).
In the year 2006, 251 million tonnes of MSW was produced by U.S. residents, businesses and institutions. This approximately constitutes of 4.6 pounds of waste per day (EPA, 2007). Workers collecting solid waste are typically exposed to health hazards associated with lifting, punctures or lacerations and traffic accidents. The risks involved in collection also vary depending on what type of solid waste is being collected. For example, asbestos can be harmful if inhaled as the microscopic fibres affect the lungs.
In Denmark, occupational related health risks were identified in a waste sorting plant with the help of medical examination and dust analysis. The results showed that the workers in an enclosed waste sorting plant in Denmark were suffering from illness, mainly asthma, due to high particulate levels containing bacteria and endotoxins derived from decaying waste (Malmros et al, 1991). The situation is much more serious and complex in lesser developed countries where waste collection methods are still very crude exposing the workers to higher levels of risk. In the case of India, traditionally, garbage is collected by ‘rag-pickers’ numbering to around 80,000 in the capital city of Delhi alone. These workers work in inhuman and unhygienic conditions to clear the waste (Sule, 2007). Materials recovery facilitates (MRF), as mentioned earlier, involves recycling of waste for recovery and sale. The main risk associated with this type of processing is also health related. These MRFs may be ‘dirty’ and may have to be sorted by hand. Without suitable precautions taken, workers can contract harmful disease when they come in contact with these (LGEAN, 2007).
Health risks related to waste management are very intense especially in case of waste management projects that look into clinical waste management. Based on the Controlled Waste Regulations (1992), clinical waste has been defined as ‘any waste which consists wholly or partly of human or animal tissue, blood or any other body fluids, excretions, drugs or other pharmaceutical products, swabs or dressings, or syringes, needles or other sharp instruments, being waste which unless rendered safe may prove hazardous to any person coming into contact with it; and any other waste arising from medical, nursing, dental, veterinary, pharmaceutical or similar practice, investigation, treatment, care, teaching or research, or the collection of blood for transfusion, being waste which may cause infection to any person coming into contact with it’ (Statutory Instrument, 1992).
As evident from the name itself, clinical wastes are usually by-products of hospitals, clinics, doctor’s surgeries and veterinary clinics. However, it may also constitute a substantial part of nursing homes, residential homes as well as private thresholds. The risks associated with such wastes magnifies when they are not separated and disposed off with other household waste, making it very difficult to separately treat them (Ealing, 2007). If clinical wastes are infectious, they may be termed as hazardous waste.
As the nature of the waste implies, harmful germs and bacteria can be transmitted through such wastes and thus proper handling is essential. However, the risks are mainly high for most hospital staffs such as nurses, cleaners, handlers, laundry workers, doctors, surgeons, waste disposal workers, dental staff and post-mortem staff. In extreme cases, the transmission of harmful bacteria can lead to epidemics escalating the risk to regional scale. Thus management needs to be extra vigilant went dealing with hazardous waste such as these.
Environmental risks associated with waste management projects can be associated with the kind of technology used. This becomes more apparent when taking the case of waste collection from households is concerned. In these kinds of waste management projects, collection of separated and not separated solid waste is a critical component within the waste management program. ‘Collection starts with the containers holding materials that a generator has designated as no longer useful and end with the transportation of solid wastes or recyclables to a location of processing, transfer or disposal’ (Tchobanoglous & Kreith, 2002). The risks that are associated with this type of project are linked to the technology that has been used in facilitating waste collection though an agreement between waste generators and waste collectors. Technology used defers within countries and also from country to country. Thus the kind of risk imposed considerably differs.
The risks are higher in countries where technology is not well developed and crude techniques are involved. As mentioned previously, in India, this was the case as people used to sort this kind of waste by hand from communal dustbins. To reduce such risks on health of these workers the MSW Rules 2000 have been recently implemented by the Supreme Court of India, which require municipalities to extend themselves to primary collection of garbage (door to door) instead of the earlier practice of secondary collection from the common collection points (containers) on the street. This helps to reduce environmental pollution in the form of spread of harmful wastes through communal dustbins which may not be maintained properly. Thus, legislation may prove helpful to change or reduce risks of such projects. However, the management needs to carefully consider how the waste is collected from the source, This informs the management of the kind of waste composition it is handling. The management also needs to be vigilant about the storage condition of the waste in order to avoid environmental risks of polluting the environment. Recent study in this area in developing country context has revealed the risks of flies transmitted disease from such bins (Banerjee, 2006).
Environmental risks of waste management projects are also associated with the strategies that are adopted for waste disposal. Landfills are hugely debatable methods of waste disposal. Before the waste is dumped into a landfill a liner is used to stop harmful chemicals being leeched into the ground. However, one of the recent major concerns is related to the lifespan of these liners which are about fifty years. This adds on to the risk of environmental pollution which may affect ground water, soil quality eventually leading to greater risks of reaching the food cycle (LGEAN, 2007). The pollutants in the gas are volatile organic compounds (VOC), which are not readily absorbed by the soil or the biota. The atmosphere acts as the medium though which the gas travels. Collection systems capture most of this gas, however, some of it still escapes. Clearly, the risks that are associated with land filling are grave. They may not be immediately apparent but in the long run may be the cause of serious environmental as well as health hazards (Eschenroeder & Stackelberg, 1991). Landfills may again be classified as construction and demolition landfills and pre-Subtitle D landfills. Both these types of landfills are associated with environmental risks such as impact on groundwater pollution, gas explosion and asphyxiation warming (LGEAN, 2007). Thus, the management needs to be aware of the kind of disposal method it is using as each option comes with its own unique set of risks.
In case of yet another method of waste disposal such as combustion, the type of environmental risks involved differs considerably. Combustion is yet another process of reducing the waste weight and volume. It is also referred to as ‘waste-to-energy’ facilities or ‘incineration’. The energy that is released as a result of this combustion is also used up. Although this is a cheaper option, the recent growing concern of green house gas emissions is making this option less environmental friendly. However, the risks associated with processing waste in this manner are comparatively less. This is partly due to the extensive regulations, which covers this type of waste management techniques (LGEAN, 2007). The usual risk is related to the re-use of the ash. This ash may be used for road constructions and filling open pits of mines. However, when ash is used in the production of concrete and or roads, there is concern about the potential leaching that may take place from the ash affecting local groundwater sources (LGEAN, 2007). Currently, there is active debate on the suitability of this technique in comparison with landfills (Eschenroeder & Stackelberg, 1991).
From the above discussion it can be concluded that waste management projects impose a certain level of risks for the management. These risks are varied and depend upon the type of waste handled, the technology used and to a certain extent the context in which such projects function. They can be broadly classified as environmental risks, social risks and financial risks. These types of risks are not mutually exclusive, they are but overlapping in nature. They can escalate from a local scale to regional scale. Certain environmental risks, such as green house gas emissions are of a global scale and efficient waste management strategy at local level can go a long way in tackling such issues. With proper planning and understanding, most of the risks can be avoided. It is crucial for the management to be aware of the type of waste that is being handled, the end users of the by-product (if at all), of the waste and the disposal method that is used. Understanding legislation requirement especially for controlled waste is usually a good way for the management to scope risks associated with a particular waste management project. Slight adjustments and careful considerations of the usage of techniques and management strategies can go a long way in risk reduction if not total avoidance.