6.3.5 Waste Management

6.3.5 Waste Management

How does globalization affect the environment?

When we consume anything, whether food, energy, water, or manufactured goods, some form of waste is generated. The more money we have, the more stuff we buy. The more we buy, the more we throw away — not only the packaging but also items we no longer want or need. Landfills around the world are insufficient for the amount of garbage generated by people.

In 2016, Canadians produced about 688 kg per person. (Statistics Canada, 2018)

Reduce, Re-use, Recycle: Consumers the world over are encouraged to reduce the amount they consume and the amount of garbage they produce. Curbside recycling and recycling depots help manage the vast amounts of garbage produced in cities, towns, and rural areas. Nonetheless, waste management is a huge issue throughout the world.

Out of sight, out of mind: The effect of human activity on the environment is not always pretty. In the developed world, cities and towns have waste management programs in which garbage is efficiently picked up and transported to landfills or sewage treatment facilities far away from view. Do you know where your town dump is? Have you ever seen your sewage lagoon?

The by-products of heavy industry often are generated in industrial areas away from residences. By-products of the tar sands and mining operations are more difficult to hide, but they are located in rural areas where most people do not see them. People who live in the boreal forest know that logging operations frequently leave a strip of trees along the highway so people do not see the effects of the harvesting of trees. The fact that most of us do not want to see, hear, or smell the unpleasant effects of waste is sometimes called NIMBY—"not in my backyard".

Pollution in the developing world is more difficult to hide. Many nations in the developing world are desperate to gain wealth. As people in the developing world scavenge through garbage dumps to obtain discarded goods for re-use or resale, companies and governments accept waste from other nations in exchange for payment.

No one likes pollution, especially in their backyard. For this reason, waste is often transported to areas of low population or to the developing world. This is especially true for hazardous waste that can have a harmful effect on living organisms. This presents both a challenge and an opportunity. When it is done correctly, disposal of hazardous waste limits its possible harmful effects and provides employment to skilled workers. However, when hazardous waste is shipped to inappropriate centres, great damage can occur.

Case Study: Toxic Waste: Swan Hills, Alberta

Environmental safety: The waste products are tested and tracked from the time they leave their point of origin until they are permanently disposed of at the plant. Once the waste materials arrive at the plant, they do not leave. The plant itself operates under some of the most stringent environmental controls in the world. Under its operating license, air quality, soil, groundwater, and even the health of insects and animals are monitored.

Problems with the plant: The plant has not been without problems. In the 1990s, a leak of residual incineration by-products into the air, an explosion at the plant, and the discovery of contaminants in local wildlife led to a call from First Nations groups to close the plant. The 7000 Aboriginal people who hunt and trap in the area rely on wild game and were concerned about the effects of these toxins on their food. Since that time, the First Nations Community has come to accept the plant and is now a supporter of the facility. The First Nations Community in the area now has an Accord with the Swan Hills Treatment Center, and the facility exists in harmony with the community in general. In 2000, Bovar (the company that had been operating the plant) relinquished ownership of the facility to the Alberta Government. In 2003, Earth Tech was awarded a contract to operate and maintain the facility for the Alberta Government for ten years. Suez Canada Waste Services Inc. has made important strides in environmental health and safety, and the facility recently surpassed 1.3 million man hours without a lost-time accident.

With files from Pierre Lavigne, National Sales Representative, SUEZ Canada Waste Services Inc. Swan Hills Treatment Center

The Swan Hills plant shows how toxic waste can be disposed of in the developed world using state-of-the-art technology and strict environmental controls. However, toxic waste is also often shipped to the developing world. Governments and people there, desperate for any way to make a living, accept waste that they are unable to process, and the results are disastrous.

Case Study: Toxic Waste: Cote D'Ivoire, Africa

Who is responsible? In August of 2006, a ship registered in Panama, owned by a Greek shipping company, and chartered to the Dutch company Trafigura shipped waste to Abidjan in Cote D'Ivoire (Ivory Coast), West Africa. The Dutch company is an oil trading company and claims that the toxins were a result of routine cleaning of its tanks using caustic soda.

Inadequate Facilities: Trafigura had tried to have the waste processed in the Netherlands, but when the waste appeared to be unusually toxic, the contracted Dutch waste management company raised its prices and forced the company to find another location. They first stopped in Estonia where they found a company willing to accept the waste for more than they were prepared to pay, and then Nigeria where they could find no one to process it. A company called Compaigne Tommy in Abidjan agreed to take the waste, but instead of processing it properly, they illegally dumped it in the middle of the night into 17 landfill sites within the densely populated city. Ivory Coast has no toxic waste disposal facilities. Ten people died of the toxic fumes, 23 were hospitalized, and 40 000 were treated at hospitals and clinics for vomiting, diarrhea, nosebleeds, headaches, and respiratory problems. A large number of pigs were also slaughtered for fear they were contaminated with the "toxic slop". The sludge later was found to contain hydrogen sulfide.

Consequences? Immediately after this incident, a number of African officials resigned. The Dutch-based Trafigura, while denying responsibility for the disaster, agreed to pay the Ivorian government US$198m for clean-up and an inquiry, and to secure the release of three of its employees who had travelled to Abidjan immediately after the incident was reported to help with the cleanup and were arrested and held for five months.

Need for balance: These two case studies show that toxic waste can be disposed of adequately. It also raises some questions in our globalizing world. Is there a balance between environmental safety and making money? Should large corporations use the developed world to dispose of their waste when safety standards are rarely adequate? What role do national governments play in ensuring that the environment is protected and that people are safe? How can the global community ensure that the environment is protected?