1. TRP Chapter 5.4 1 Chapter 5.4 Facility development

2. TRP Chapter 5.4 2 Components of an integrated hazardous waste management strategy ENFORCEMENT LEGISLATION SUPPORT SERVICES FACILITIES Institutional arrangements Stakeholders Source: David C Wilson 1993, 1999

3. TRP Chapter 5.4 3 The implementation conundrum Source: David C Wilson

4. TRP Chapter 5.4 4 Waste hierarchy Source: David C Wilson 1993, 1997, 2001

5. 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 operation Intermediate 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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)

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. TRP Chapter 5.4 17 A step-wise approach: Bangkok case study Treatment plant and storage sumps Source: David C Wilson

18. 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

19. 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