The Union of Concerned Scientist asserts that in order to prevent “dangerous” climate change, we must stabilize the global concentration of atmospheric green house gasses at 450 parts per million (ppm). Stabilization at or below this level, would provide a 50% or “medium chance,” of avoiding a temperature rise of more than 2 degrees Celsius. One we reach our peak emission point, atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations will continue to rise due to the lifetimes of various gasses. Therefore our concentration will most likely be above 450ppm for some period of time. To reach stability at 450 ppm, society must reduce green house gas emissions by 80% by 2050. Under this scenario, industrialized nations must reach their peak emissions rate by 2010 while developing nations must reach peak emissions between 2020 and 2025. These are some pretty startling numbers… Developed nations, we’ve got 81 days and counting.
Waste management as a sector is only responsible for 2.8% of total greenhouse gases, (Kump and Mann 159), but it’s a sector that can be almost eliminated. There are currently two mainstream methods of dealing with out waste: incineration & land filling. The main climate change concern is the release of methane, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than Carbon Dioxide, from anaerobic decomposition in landfills. There are other environmental and social concerns surrounding waste management but because connections to climate change are not as apparent as those of methane, they are often overlooked.
As a form of disposal, incineration or the burning of solid waste, reduces trash volume, decreases the area required for landfills, and produces less water pollution that landfills. Also, in recent years, incineration has been touted for its “waste to energy” potential. Kump and Mann describe incineration as “waste recycling” and as an inexpensive “renewable energy resource.” This however is not entirely true. Waste is indeed being burned to create energy. In the United States, Waste Management’s “Waste to Energy” program has produced over 75 billion kilowatt hours of energy. But this is not exactly a clean process. Waste incineration is responsible for the creation of the most toxic chemicals on earth: Dioxins. Many of these incinerators are built in low-income, minority communities, where resistance is weak. Read about an example of this phenomena in “Race, Wealth, and Solid Waste Facilities in North Carolina“.
Waste incineration plant
Waste incineration can be considered “recycling” in the sense that toxic chemicals in solid waste are “recycled” in to air pollution and toxic ash, but this is stretching the definition. Those opposed to incineration argue that the process actually discourages recycling and waste prevention. Incineration destroys potentially useful products, products that can be reused, recycled, or composted. When we burn a piece of paper, or a metal bed-frame we destroy a valuable resource. Replacing these items, usually from scratch, wastes even more natural resources, requires even more energy, and emits even more greenhouse gases.
A landfill and flock of birds
Landfilling our waste is the more common of the two management options. In a landfill, thin layers of solid waste are compacted in confined areas creating an anaerobic environment. Bacteria slowly decompose the waste, releasing methane, into the atmosphere. In recent years, methane recovery has become a business; landfills are extracting/capturing methane from their off-gas and selling it as en energy source. Reducing methane emissions is a lucrative mitigation practice and the use of this technology is predicted to increase as climate change becomes ever pressing.
Ground water contamination from landfill leachate is a major source of concern. Leachate refers to water that percolates through landfill systems, becomes contaminated and filters out of the waste. This contamination of groundwater can lead to serious health problems for those living within a landfills watershed. For more information on health impacts, click here. Newly constructed landfills have strict design requirements to collect leachate water and dispose of it properly. However, it is very difficult to ensure that no leachate escapes into surrounding groundwater. What does landfill leachate have to do with climate change? Although there may be no apparent direct connection, access to clean, drinkable water is excepted to decline as our climate change. As we mitigate and adapt to climate change, we can only help ourselves by thinking broadly about the impacts of our actions.
compost cycle
The real question is, what is waste? Mann and Kump say, “life pollutes.” Others are saying, waste is a resource; in natural systems, there is no such thing as waste. Byproducts are coproducts and are always used. If we adjust out thinking about waste, and start asking ourselves, “what can i do with this?” instead of, “where can I throw this?” our waste will decrease dramatically.
According to the EPA, nearly 25% of the waste we landfill is organic matter that can be composted. Compost is then used to fertilize agricultural soils, decreasing our dependence on fossil fuel based fertilizers. Many sources suggest that another 70% of the solid waste we landfill and incinerate is recyclable- metals, plastics, and paper.
Bioremediation, (the process of using microorganism and enzymes to destroy and breakdown toxic/hazardous materials into harmless compounds) and Phytoremediation (the use of plants to filter and remove toxins) are gaining ground in waste management industry. By using natural decomposers and altering environments through catalysts such as temperature or ph we can mimic natural processes and turn our wastes into resources.
Moral of the story: Think before you consume. Separate out your “wastes” into resource piles. Reuse! Reuse! Reuse!
Tags: climate change, Danielle Hoffman, landfills, mitigation, waste, waste incineration
