Waste!!! Byproducts of Modern Living: A Historial View

1. Waste!!! Byproducts of Modern Living: A Historial View

2. Electronic Waste Chemical Waste Broad Categories

3. Biohazardous Waste Nuclear Waste

4. Aggregation of humans gave rise to complex societies. • With population density come waste disposal issues – the environment can always tolerate a degree of waste. • Initially mostly food, human waste – biodegradable, but these caused eutrophication of local ecosystems. • Agriculture caused environmental changes (waterlogging -> increased mosquitos near humans -> increased disease…). Low-level industrial pollution (metalworking, etc.) Increased birth defects noted at locations downstream from foundries, etc. History of Waste Disposal

5. The Industrial Revolution: • Metal, coal, oil refining begins in earnest. • These are generally dumped, as the consequences are not yet understood, and the population is low enough to get away with this. • Air pollution becomes an increasing factor, as the combustion of energy sources is the primary driving force of the Industrial Revolution. • Energy production and transportation cause air pollution harmful to human health. This correlates with CO2 production, but consequences unknown. History of Waste Disposal

6. The Modern Era: • Electronics dominate, defining the current era. • High usage of heavy metals – Lead, Mercury, Cadmium, etc., all extremely toxic. • > 2 million tons disposed of in 2018. • Plastics and modern chemistry expanded the range of available molecules for human use. • Many of these proved toxic, but their toxicities were often unknown until later. . History of Waste Disposal

7. BPA Used in injection molding for polycarbonates. It is an Estrogen analogue Banned in products for infants in Canada, European Union, but not in the U.S. Atrazine Most common pesticide in the US. Causes birth defects, menstruation problems at concentrations below US standards, and major birth defects in tadpoles and frogs (heart and lung defects, and hermaphorditisim). Banned in the EU, but not in the U.S. Bovine somatotrophin (Growth Hormone)/”Polisac” Hormone used to increase growth of cows and milk production. Linked to increased cancer risk. Banned in Canada, NZ, Japan, Israel, and the EU, but not in the U.S. Questionable Substances

8. 60-80% of US-produced waste is exported to other countries (~ 2 million tons/year). Formerly China, but still India, Pakistan, and many countries across Africa. Why can’t we take care of our own? In the U.S., only 15-20% is recycled (~400,000 tons). The remainder is disposed of in American landfills Including “Superfund” sites – like nuclear waste, dumped and left to sit. But doors for potential future action are open! What do we do with it?

9. Internationally ignored African toxic waste dumping “Unscrupulous scrap merchants are illegally dumping millions of tons of dangerous waste on the developing world under the guise of exporting it for use in schools and hospitals.” http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/gallery/2008/may/06/computer.waste?picture=333898282#/?picture=333898285&index=3

10. “The UN envoy for Somalia confirmed that European and Asian companies are dumping toxic waste, including nuclear waste, off the Somali coastline.” Somalian “Pirates” Nick Nuttall, UN Environment Programme: ”The waste is of many kinds. (1) uranium radioactive waste. (2) lead and heavy metals like cadmium and mercury. (3) industrial waste, (4) hospital and chemical wastes – you name it." http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2008/10/2008109174223218644.html

11. This was known since the 1990’s, but proven with the 2004 tsunami, sending barrels of chemical and nuclear waste onto Somali shorelines. Resulting health problems range from “acute respiratory infections to dry heavy coughing, mouth bleedings, abdominal hemorrhaging, and what they described as unusual skin chemical reactions” . The extent of this pollution is not fully understood due to the ongoing insecurity of the region, preventing further investigation. Disposing of these substances in the producer countries can cost up to $1000 a ton, but dumping in the waters of Somalia can cost $2.50 a ton (400x reduction in cost).

12. Further destabilizing the region is the fact that those responsible for the dumping are generally paying local officials or warlords, in questionable seats of power given Somalia’s political strife. “Those Responsible” has been a tricky question, given that at least one firm under investigation did not actually exist and was a proxy for other firms to funnel their waste through. Somalian fishermen have begun taking matters into their own hands, but have been met with violent force. There are also genuine, for-profit pirates off of the coast of Somalia.

13. Click to edit Master text styles Second level • Third level • Fourth level • Fifth level Africa also receives The short end on oil production “Coker gasoline”, toxic waste from petroleum refining was dumped by a swiss-based metals and energy company (Trafigura), dumped in 2006 off the Ivory Coast. Highly alkaline and containing sulfur, alkyl-thiols and hydrogen sulfide, this led to the poisoning of an estimated 108,000 people. Convictions have been issued that attest that the company covered up the toxicity of the toxic waste to make it easier and cheaper to sell.

14. “Amnesty International and environmental NGOs have accused an Anglo-Dutch company of failing to clean up oil spills and continuing the hazardous practice of flaring gas from around 100 wells in the region.” Al Jazeera The Nigerian River Delta http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2011/01/201112615645590276.html

15. Royal Dutch Shell has people in "all the relevant ministries" in the Nigerian government and has access to "everything being done in those ministries," according to leaked diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks. Many protesters were executed. When spills are considered as sabotage, the company claims no responsibility or liability. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-cables-shell-nigeria-spying

16. “A ruptured ExxonMobil pipeline in the state of Akwa Ibom in Nigeria spilled more than a million gallons of oil into the delta over seven days before the leak was stopped. Local people demonstrated against the company but say they were attacked by security guards. Community leaders are now demanding $1 bn in compensation for the illnesses and loss of livelihood they suffered. Few expect they will succeed. In the meantime, thick balls of tar are being washed up along the coast…”

17. Waste is smelted down over an open fire, the solder (primairly lead and tin) is collected and used as scrap metal. This scrap metal finds its way into consumer goods, including exported goods such as jewelry. The toxic metals include Lead, Cadmium and Antimony. Heavy Metals

18. ~250,000 bullets were fired per “insurgent” killed; white phosphorous was used in great volume (as a tactical smokescreen). Cancer (primarily Leukemia), infant mortality, and birth defects are currently higher in Fallujah than they were in Hiroshima following the end of WWII. This corresponds exactly with the U.S.-led 2004 offensive in the city. (infant mortality: 80 per 1000 births, compared to 19/1000 in Egypt, 17 in Jordan, 9.7 in Kuwait, and 6.8 in the U.S.). Types of cancer (38x increase in leukemia, 10x breast cancers, significantly more brain cancers & lymphomas), speed of onset, and change in gender ratios (less boys, due to weaker DNA) fits exactly the profile for radiation poisoning as occurred in Hiroshima, or something else with a very similar mutagenic mechanism. Fallujah, Iraq • http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/toxic-legacy-of-us-assault-on-fallujah-worse-than-hiroshima-2034065.html

19. All of these substances will leach through the ground, polluting groundwater sources and becoming inaccessible. The effects of these pollutants on human health are often irreversible: • Many neurotoxic effects are irreversible. • Developmental and endocrinological damage is similarly irreversible. • Scar tissue in the kidneys and liver can be permanent. • Cancer risk is increased many fold. • Organic compounds may be degraded to more toxic substances. • Heavy metals bioaccumulate in biological systems. The Effects

20. Current technology gives us few options; bioremediation exists, with major limitations • Bacteria and fungi are particularly good at breaking down organic compounds or reducing highly oxidized metals (e.g. hexavalent chromium). • Problems: controlling the growth of bacteria, preventing bacterial contamination of the surrounding area, engineering bacteria that are appropriate for the given environment. Solving the Problem? Bacteria have proven useful in breaking down the compounds that leak from oil spills and exist naturally around petroleum seeps in the deep ocean. But it takes years.

21. Phytoremediation (bioremediation with plants) Plants can be engineered to take up heavy metals from the roots and store them in the leaves, making harvesting these plants an efficient way to remove pollutants from the ecosystem. They can also be useful in breaking down complex organic pollutants. • Cost of soil treatment. Treatment Cost ($/ton) Additional factors/expenses Vitrification 75-425 Long-term monitoring Landfilling 100-500 Transport/excavation/ monitoring Chemical treatment 100-500 Recycling of contaminants Electrokinetics 20-200 Monitoring Phytoextraction 5-40 Monitoring The cheapest options available to us! http://www.engg.k-state.edu/HSRC/JHSR/vol2no5.pdf

22. Potential Problems of Plant Bioremediation: The growth speed of the plant requires a major time commitment. Preventing the plant from escaping into the wild as an invasive species may be difficult. Preventing local predation (causing the accumulation of these heavy metals in the grazing species) may be impossible. Root systems may not be extensive, requiring many plants.

24. Pawła Kuczyńskiego