Waste management hierarchy

Treatment of waste should be considered only after source reduction and recycling options are fully addressed. Treatment includes methods for separation of the metals fraction from the wastes stream. This typically involves neutralization, precipitation, filtration and drying operations. Waste treatment, although often desirable and necessary, is not considered to be a waste minimization option by the USEPA 

---

Although the quantities reported for the first two years are estimates of quantities already managed, the quantities reported for the third and fourth years are projections only. U.S. EPA requires these projections to encourage facilities to consider future waste generation and source reduction of those quantities as well as movement up the waste management hierarchy. Future-year estimates are not commitments that facilities reporting under TRI are required to meet. 

Wolf, K. May 1988. "Source Reduction and the Waste Management Hierarchy." Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, vol. 38, No.5, p.681. 

The next paragraphs discuss the inadequacy of end-of-pipe pollution control approaches, waste management hierarchy, incentives gained from adopting waste minimization practices, barriers to effective waste minimization, and applications of waste minimization programs in drilling operations. The following is a summary. 

The U.S. EPA has already established a hazardous waste management hierarchy [20,21]. This hierarchy represents an attempt to build environmental protection into the industrial waste management process. It encourages industries to reduce their hazardous wastes at the source and to recycle rather than treat and/or dispose of wastes to land, air and water. This hierarchy of hazardous waste management is presented in Fig. 2. The following is a summary. 

General rules for P2 follow the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 13101-13109) and are applicable to any manufacturing activity. This act clearly identifies the waste management hierarchy, and we list them in Table 6.1 for completeness. The P2 Hierarchy specific to a chemical process is derived from this set of principles. 

Elements of the waste management hierarchy can be placed in the following order of preference " ... 

The waste management hierarchy introduces a myriad of terms that require definitions due to subtle differences between them. To precisely define these terms is an arduous task that becomes even more complex when regulatory definitions are added to an originally operational or technical definition. Table 1 provides generally accepted definitions for some of the most commonly encountered terms in the literature of this field. 

The term waste reduction and the related term waste minimization project broader meanings than source reduction. Waste reduction and waste minimization generally incorporate both source reduction and on-site recycling (i.e., the first two or three elements of the waste management hierarchy.) For the puipose of this article, the definition offered here will/would be adopted. 

Remark It is generally acknowledged that P2 encompasses the first two or three elements of the waste management hierarchy for all wastes and emissions. ... 

Figure 1 The waste management hierarchy with shaded boxes indicates elements that are included in the definition of the terms waste reduction and pollution prevention that are used interchangeably throughout this chapter. (Adapted from Refs. 3 and 4.)...

This more local plan is also set in the context of the waste management hierarchy. The document states that for London, even if all waste was incinerated, there would be insufficient landfill capacity for the remaining ash, and therefore clearly indicates the urgent need to for others to adopt a more strategic approach to waste, and landfiU management. 

Before focusing on landfill activities alone, it is worth looking briefly at the other elements of a waste management hierarchy in order to be able to better identify the role of landfill disposal within an integrated waste management strategy. 

A further obstacle to the development of sustainable landfilling practices is the reliance on a strict waste management hierarchy (Qiapter 1), diat places landfill as a last resort measure. Waste mimimisation and recycling should, under most circumstances, remain the preferred waste management options, but once these possibilities have been exhausted, the choice of treatment/disposal route should be on the basis of the Best Practicable Environmental Option. This will equate with the most sustainable option. LandflU will almost certainly constitute BPEO for some waste streams, and for these wastes, landfill should be used as the preferred management option. 

The Waste Management Hierarchy, i.e. minimization, recovery and transformation, and land disposal have been adopted by most developed countries with strategies used depending on such factors as population density, transportation infrastructure, socioeconomic and environmental regulations. 

The concept is to encourage those activities which ascend the Hierarchy. The top of the Hierarchy is Reduce. This is the only option which does not use up initial resources such as raw materials and energy from fossil fuels to make the product or supply the service in the first place. In sophisticated applications the Waste Management Hierarchy is applied to all stages of a product cycle as illustrated in Figure 5.1.2. 

The list of possible options for the management of each waste stream should be reviewed using an approach similar to step (b) above. The waste management hierarchy of Avoid - Minimise - Reuse - Recycle -Recover energy - Dispose should be followed. 

In developing the generic IWS, due regard has also been taken of the national strategies (England and Wales) (Reference 15.9) that set out a waste management hierarchy that promotes waste avoidance, waste minimisation and recycling above disposal to landfill. 

---