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