Title: Unit 15
Course: BIS 105 Environmental Biology > Section: BIS 105 Environmental Biology

Unit 15

Regulations
Copyright
Adapted from U of I Open Source Textbook. Sustainability: A Comprehensive Foundation. Connexions. 18 Sep 2012 .

Waste is an inevitable by-product of human life. Virtually every human activity generates some type of material side effect or by-product. When the materials that constitute these by-products are not useful or have been degraded such that they no longer fulfill their original or other obvious useful purpose, they are classified as a waste material.

Practically speaking, wastes are generated from a wide range of sources and are usually classified by their respective sources. Common generative activities include those associated with residences, commercial businesses and enterprises, institutions, construction and demolition activities, municipal services, and water/wastewater and air treatment plants, and municipal incinerator facilities. Further, wastes are generated from numerous industrial processes, including industrial construction and demolition, fabrication, manufacturing, refineries, chemical synthesis, and nuclear power/nuclear defense sources (often generating low- to high-level radioactive wastes).

Population growth and urbanization (with increased industrial, commercial and institutional establishments) contribute to increased waste production, as do the rapid economic growth and industrialization throughout the developing world. These social and economic changes have led to an ever-expanding consumption of raw materials, processed goods, and services. While these trends have, in many ways, improved the quality of life for hundreds of millions of people, it has not come without drastic costs to the environment. Proper management of a range of wastes has become necessary in order to protect public health and the environment as well as ensure sustained economic growth.

It is commonly believed that incineration and landfill disposal represent preferred options in dealing with waste products; however, many wastes have the potential to be recycled or re-used for some purpose or in some manner. Some waste materials may be reclaimed or re-generated and used again for their original or similar purpose, or they may be physically or chemically changed and employed for alternative uses. As natural resources continue to be depleted, and as incineration and landfill disposal options become more costly and unsustainable, numerous economic and social incentives are being promoted by government agencies to prevent or reduce waste generation and develop new methods and technologies for recycling and reusing wastes. Such efforts can have broader implications for energy conservation and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to global climate change, while concurrently fostering sustainable waste management practices.

This section provides an overview of the existing regulatory framework mandating the management of wastes, environmental concerns associated with waste generation and management, and various alternatives for the proper management of wastes. Recent developments towards the development of sustainable waste management systems are also highlighted. It should be mentioned here that although the content of this section reflects the regulatory framework and practices within the United States, similar developments and actions have occurred in other developed countries and are increasingly being initiated in numerous developing countries.

Regulatory Framework

During the course of the 20^th century, especially following World War II, the United States experienced unprecedented economic growth. Much of the growth was fueled by rapid and increasingly complex industrialization. With advances in manufacturing and chemical applications also came increases in the volume, and in many cases the toxicity, of generated wastes. Furthermore, few if any controls or regulations were in place with respect to the handling of toxic materials or the disposal of waste products. Continued industrial activity led to several high-profile examples of detrimental consequences to the environment resulting from these uncontrolled activities. Finally, several forms of intervention, both in the form of government regulation and citizen action, occurred in the early 1970s.

Ultimately, several regulations were promulgated on the state and federal levels to ensure the safety of public health and the environment. With respect to waste materials, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), enacted by the United States Congress, first in 1976 and then amended in 1984, provides a comprehensive framework for the proper management of hazardous and non-hazardous solid wastes in the United States. RCRA stipulates broad and general legal objectives while mandating the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop specific regulations to implement and enforce the law. States and local governments can either adopt the federal regulations, or they may develop and enforce more stringent regulations than those specified in RCRA. Similar regulations have been developed or are being developed worldwide to manage wastes in a similar manner in other countries.

The broad goals of RCRA include: (1) the protection of public health and the environment from the hazards of waste disposal; (2) the conservation of energy and natural resources; (3) the reduction or elimination of waste; and (4) the assurance that wastes are managed in an environmentally-sound manner (e.g. the remediation of waste which may have spilled, leaked, or been improperly disposed). It should be noted here that the RCRA focuses only on active and future facilities and does not address abandoned or historical sites. These types of environmentally impacted sites are managed under a different regulatory framework, known as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), or more commonly known as "Superfund."

Solid Waste Regulations

RCRA defines solid waste as any garbage or refuse, sludge from a wastewater treatment plant, water supply treatment plant, or air pollution control facility and other discarded material, including solid, liquid, semi-solid, or contained gaseous material resulting from industrial, commercial, mining, and agricultural operations, and from community activities. In general, solid waste can be categorized as either non-hazardous waste or hazardous waste.

Non-hazardous solid waste can be trash or garbage generated from residential households, offices and other sources. Generally, these materials are classified as municipal solid waste (MSW). Alternatively, non-hazardous materials that result from the production of goods and products by various industries (e.g. coal combustion residues, mining wastes, cement kiln dust), are collectively known as industrial solid waste. Regulations prohibit the open dumping of solid waste, mandates the development of comprehensive plans to manage MSW and non-hazardous industrial waste, and establishes criteria for MSW landfills and other solid waste disposal facilities. Because they are classified as non-hazardous material, many components of MSW and industrial waste have potential for recycling and re-use. Significant efforts are underway by both government agencies and industry to advance these objectives.

Hazardous waste, generated by many industries and businesses (e.g. dry cleaners and auto repair shops), is constituted of materials that are dangerous or potentially harmful to human health and the environment. Regulations control hazardous waste from the time they are generated until their ultimate disposal (a timeline often referred to as "cradle to grave").

Solid waste is defined as hazardous if it appears in one of the four hazardous waste classifications:

- F-List, which includes wastes from common manufacturing and industrial processes, such as solvents used in cleaning and degreasing operations.

- K-list, which includes certain wastes from specific industries such as petroleum or pesticide manufacturing.

- P-list and U-list, which include commercial chemicals products in their unused form.

Additionally, a waste is classified as hazardous if it exhibits at least one of these four characteristics:

- Ignitability, which refers to creation of fires under certain conditions; including materials that are spontaneously combustible or those that have a flash point less than 140°F.

- Corrosivity, which refers to capability to damage metal containers; including materials with a pH less than or equal to 2 or greater than or equal to 12.5.

- Reactivity, which refers to materials susceptible to unstable conditions such as explosions, toxic fumes, gases, or vapors when heated, compressed, or mixed with water under normal conditions.

- Toxicity, which refers to substances that can induce harmful or fatal effects when ingested or absorbed, or inhaled.

Radioactive Waste Regulations

Although non-hazardous waste (MSW and industrial non-hazardous waste) and hazardous waste are regulated by RCRA, nuclear or radioactive waste is regulated in accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the United States.

Radioactive wastes are characterized according to four categories: (1) High-level waste (HLW), (2) Transuranic waste (TRU), (3) Low-level waste (LLW), and (4) Mill tailings. Various radioactive wastes decay at different rates, but health and environmental dangers due to radiation may persist for hundreds or thousands of years.

HLW is typically liquid or solid waste that results from government defense related activities or from nuclear power plants and spent fuel assemblies. These wastes are extremely dangerous due to their heavy concentrations of radionuclides, and humans must not come into contact with them.

TRU mainly results from the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuels and from the fabrication of nuclear weapons for defense projects. They are characterized by moderately penetrating radiation and a decay time of approximately twenty years until safe radionuclide levels are achieved. Following the passage of a reprocessing ban in 1977, most of this waste generation ended. Even though the ban was lifted in 1981, TRU continues to be rare because reprocessing of nuclear fuel is expensive. Further, because the extracted plutonium may be used to manufacture nuclear weapons, political and social pressures minimize these activities.

LLW wastes include much of the remainder of radioactive waste materials. They constitute over 80 percent of the volume of all nuclear wastes, but only about two percent of total radioactivity. Sources of LLW include all of the previously cited sources of HLW and TRU, plus wastes generated by hospitals, industrial plants, universities, and commercial laboratories. LLW is much less dangerous than HLW, and NRC regulations allow some very low-level wastes to be released to the environment. LLW may also be stored or buried until the isotopes decay to levels low enough such that it may be disposed of as non-hazardous waste. LLW disposal is managed at the state level, but requirements for operation and disposal are established by the USEPA and NRC. The Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) is the agency in charge of setting the standards for workers that are exposed to radioactive materials.

Mill tailings generally consist of residues from the mining and extraction of uranium from its ore. There are more than 200 million tons of radioactive mill-tailings in the United States, and all of it is stored in sparsely populated areas within the western states, such as Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. These wastes emit low-level radiation, and much of it is buried to reduce dangerous emissions.

Medical Waste Regulations

Another type of waste that is of environmental concern is medical waste. Medical waste is regulated by several federal agencies, including the USEPA, OSHA, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) of the Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. During 1987-88, medical wastes and raw garbage washed up on beaches along the New Jersey Shore of the United States on several occasions (called, "Syringe Tide") which required closure of beaches. The U.S. Congress subsequently enacted the Medical Waste Tracking Act (MWTA) to evaluate management issues and potential risks related to medical waste disposal. The seven types of wastes listed under MWTA include: (1) microbiological wastes (cultures and stocks of infectious wastes and associated biological media that can cause disease in humans); (2) human blood and blood products, including serum, plasma, and other blood components; (3) pathological wastes of human origin, including tissues, organs, and other body masses removed during surgeries or autopsies); (4) contaminated animal wastes (i.e. animal carcasses, body masses, and bedding exposed to infectious agents during medical research, pharmaceutical testing, or production of biological media); (5) isolation wastes (wastes associated with animals or humans known to be infected with highly communicable diseases); (6) contaminated sharps (including hypodermic needles, scalpels, and broken glass); and (7) uncontaminated sharps. In addition, the USEPA considered including any other wastes that had been in contact with infectious agents or blood (e.g. sponges, soiled dressings, drapes, surgical gloves, laboratory coats, slides).

LLW nuclear wastes are produced in hospitals by pharmaceutical laboratories and in performing nuclear medicine procedures (e.g. medical imaging to detect cancers and heart disease); however, the danger posed by these wastes is relatively low. A variety of hazardous substances have also been identified in medical wastes, including metals such as lead, cadmium, chromium, and mercury; and toxic organics such as dioxins and furans. All medical wastes represent a small fraction of total waste stream, estimated to constitute a maximum of approximately two percent. Medical wastes are commonly disposed of through incineration: as with most wastes, the resulting volume is greatly reduced, and it assures the destruction and sterilization of infectious pathogens. Disadvantages include the potential of air pollution risks from dioxins and furans as well as the necessary disposal of potentially hazardous ash wastes. New options for disposal of medical wastes (including infectious wastes) are still being explored. Some other technologies include irradiation, microwaving, autoclaving, mechanical alternatives, and chemical disinfection, among others.

Environmental Concerns with Wastes

Managing Growing Waste Generation

An enormous quantity of wastes are generated and disposed of annually. Alarmingly, this quantity continues to increase on an annual basis. Industries generate and dispose over 7.6 billion tons of industrial solid wastes each year, and it is estimated that over 40 million tons of this waste is hazardous. Nuclear wastes as well as medical wastes are also increasing in quantity every year.

Generally speaking, developed nations generate more waste than developing nations due to higher rates of consumption. Not surprisingly, the United States generates more waste per capita than any other country. High waste per capita rates are also very common throughout Europe and developed nations in Asia and Oceania. In the United States, about 243 million tons (243 trillion kg) of MSW is generated per year, which is equal to about 4.3 pounds (1.95 kg) of waste per person per day. Nearly 34 percent of MSW is recovered and recycled or composted, approximately 12 percent is burned at combustion facilities, and the remaining 54 percent is disposed of in landfills. Waste stream percentages also vary widely by region. As an example, San Francisco, California captures and recycles nearly 75 percent of its waste material, whereas Houston, Texas recycles less than three percent.

With respect to waste mitigation options, landfilling is quickly evolving into a less desirable or feasible option. Landfill capacity in the United States has been declining primarily due to (a) older existing landfills that are increasingly reaching their authorized capacity, (b) the promulgation of stricter environmental regulations has made the permitting and siting of new landfills increasingly difficult, (c) public opposition (e.g. "Not In My Backyard" or NIMBYism) delays or, in many cases, prevents the approval of new landfills or expansion of existing facilities. Ironically, much of this public opposition arises from misconceptions about landfilling and waste disposal practices that are derived from environmentally detrimental historic activities and practices that are no longer in existence. Regardless of the degree or extent of justification, NIMBYism is a potent opposition phenomenon, whether it is associated with landfills or other land use activities, such as airports, prisons, and wastewater treatment facilities.

Effects of Improper Waste Disposal and Unauthorized Releases

Prior to the passage of environmental regulations, wastes were disposed improperly without due consideration of potential effects on the public health and the environment. This practice has led to numerous contaminated sites where soils and groundwater have been contaminated and pose risk to the public safety. Of more than 36,000 environmentally impacted candidate sites, there have been 1,685 sites listed since 1983 under the Superfund program National Priority List (NPL) which require immediate cleanup resulting from acute, imminent threats to environmental and human health. As of 2012, at 1,145 or 68% of NPL sites, all cleanup remedies are in place. Approximately 610 or 36% of NPL sites have all necessary long-term protections in place, which means EPA considers the sites protective for redevelopment or reuse. The USEPA identified about 2,500 additional contaminated sites that eventually require remediation. The United States Department of Defense maintains 19,000 sites, many of which have been extensively contaminated from a variety of uses and disposal practices. Further, approximately 400,000 underground storage tanks have been confirmed or are suspected to be leaking, contaminating underlying soils and groundwater. Over $10 billion (more than $25 billion in current dollars) were specifically allocated by CERCLA and subsequent amendments to mitigate impacted sites. However, the USEPA has estimated that the value of environmental remediation exceeds $100 billion. Alarmingly, if past expenditures on NPL sites are extrapolated across remaining and proposed NPL sites, this total may be significantly higher – well into the trillions of dollars.

Remediation team concludes clean-up of G-Street Salvage Yard in the Edgewood Area of Aberdeen Proving Ground. The site was on the National Priorities List for contamination that consisted of industrial surface and sub-surface soil contaminants, along with potential munitions and explosives of concern, and chemical warfare material.

It is estimated that more than 4,700 facilities in the United States currently treat, store or dispose of hazardous wastes. Of these, about 3,700 facilities that house approximately 64,000 solid waste management units (SWMUs) may require corrective action. Accidental spillage of hazardous wastes and nuclear materials due to anthropogenic operations or natural disasters has also caused enormous environmental damage as evidenced by the events such as the facility failure in Chernobyl, Ukraine (formerly USSR) in 1986, the effects of Hurricane Katrina that devastated New Orleans, Louisiana in 2005, and the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami in Fukushima, Japan.

Adverse Impacts on Public Health

A wide variety of chemicals are present within waste materials, many of which pose a significant environmental concern. Though the leachate generated from the wastes may contain toxic chemicals, the concentrations and variety of toxic chemicals are quite small compared to hazardous waste sites. For example, explosives and radioactive wastes are primarily located at Department of Energy (DOE) sites because many of these facilities have been historically used for weapons research, fabrication, testing, and training. Organic contaminants are largely found at oil refineries, or petroleum storage sites, and inorganic and pesticide contamination usually is the result of a variety of industrial activities as well as agricultural activities. Yet, soil and groundwater contamination are not the only direct adverse effects of improper waste management activities – recent studies have also shown that greenhouse gas emissions from the wastes are significant, exacerbating global climate change.

A wide range of toxic chemicals, with an equally wide distribution of respective concentrations, is found in waste streams. These compounds may be present in concentrations that alone may pose a threat to human health or may have a synergistic/cumulative effect due to the presence of other compounds. Exposure to hazardous wastes has been linked to many types of cancer, chronic illnesses, and abnormal reproductive outcomes such as birth defects, low birth weights, and spontaneous abortions. Many studies have been performed on major toxic chemicals found at hazardous waste sites incorporating epidemiological or animal tests to determine their toxic effects.

As an example, the effects of radioactive materials are classified as somatic or genetic. The somatic effects may be immediate or occur over a long period of time. Immediate effects from large radiation doses often produce nausea and vomiting, and may be followed by severe blood changes, hemorrhage, infection, and death. Delayed effects include leukemia, and many types of cancer including bone, lung, and breast cancer. Genetic effects have been observed in which gene mutations or chromosome abnormalities result in measurable harmful effects, such as decreases in life expectancy, increased susceptibility to sickness or disease, infertility, or even death during embryonic stages of life. Because of these studies, occupational dosage limits have been recommended by the National Council on Radiation Protection. Similar studies have been completed for a wide range of potentially hazardous materials. These studies have, in turn, been used to determine safe exposure levels for numerous exposure scenarios, including those that consider occupational safety and remediation standards for a variety of land use scenarios, including residential, commercial, and industrial land uses.

Adverse Impacts on the Environment

The chemicals found in wastes not only pose a threat to human health, but they also have profound effects on entire eco-systems. Contaminants may change the chemistry of waters and destroy aquatic life and underwater eco-systems that are depended upon by more complex species. Contaminants may also enter the food chain through plants or microbiological organisms, and higher, more evolved organisms bioaccumulate the wastes through subsequent ingestion. As the contaminants move farther up the food chain, the continued bioaccumulation results in increased contaminant mass and concentration. In many cases, toxic concentrations are reached, resulting in increased mortality of one or more species. As the populations of these species decrease, the natural inter-species balance is affected. With decreased numbers of predators or food sources, other species may be drastically affected, leading to a chain reaction that can affect a wide range of flora and fauna within a specific ecosystem. As the ecosystem continues to deviate from equilibrium, disastrous consequences may occur. Examples include the near extinction of the bald eagle due to persistent ingestion of DDT-impacted fish, and the depletion of oysters, crabs, and fish in Chesapeake Bay due to excessive quantities of fertilizers, toxic chemicals, farm manure wastes, and power plant emissions.