Background

Implications

Regional aspects

Assessing and measuring the current situation

Indicators

Management responses

Discussion

Future directions

Recommendations

Related issues

Background

Solid waste is both a by-product of consumption (natural systems create no waste) and an environmental problem itself with implications for land, water and air quality, environmental health and land use. Solid waste management is an important issue for Tasmania's environmental quality for many reasons, including the following.

• Potential contamination of surface and groundwater from landfill sites (both current operating sites and closed sites). A greater appreciation of the scope of the groundwater contamination issue in Tasmania has been made possible through the study entitled 'Effects of Waste Disposal on Tasmanian Groundwater Quality (Ezzy 2002)
   
• Potential contamination of land, the potential loss of such sites from alternative future uses and the costs associated with remediating landfill sites.
   
• Methane from landfill sites contributing to Tasmania's overall greenhouse gas emissions.
   
• Landfilling requires large land near urban areas.
   
• Incineration releases gases and particulates.
   
• The forecast filling to capacity of landfill sites in coming years with a survey conducted in 1993 finding that up to 60 landfills (50%) would fill to capacity between 1998 and 2003 (DELM 1993) and a recent survey noting that the closure of sites is an issue for many Councils.
   
• Community recognition of waste as a resource that can be reused for a variety of purposes and a high level of community involvement and participation in recycling.
   

The Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994 defines waste as any residue, by-product, surplus or reject material which is to be, or has to be, disposed of in a manner of which utilisation to commercial or other advantage is not a primary purpose.

Solid waste is produced by all sectors of society and includes household waste such as garbage and garden clippings; other waste such as street bins and street sweepings; and wastes from retail, commercial and industrial activities. It consists of municipal, commercial, industrial, building, demolition and hazardous materials. Solid waste can be classified according to the products and materials of different industries. Putrescible materials are materials that degrade and produce methane if conditions, such as water availability, are right. Putrescible materials comprise the largest proportion of municipal waste. Paper/wood products, glass, metals, and plastics constitute a significant proportion of municipal solid waste.

There are a number of disposal routes for the different types of solid waste produced:

• recycling;
• composting;
• incineration;
• landfill; and
• on-site landfill.

Controlled or hazardous waste is any waste whose quantity and notably toxic, reactive, corrosive, flammable, explosive, infective or like nature pose a substantive and unacceptable hazard to the public, the environment, or both, unless the material is dealt with by appropriately rigorous and cautious means (DELM 1993a). Controlled or hazardous waste is included as a separate issue in this report. In practice, there is a lack of dedicated hazardous waste disposal facilities in Tasmania such that some forms of hazardous waste are disposed of in conventional landfill sites.

The comparatively dispersed regional population of Tasmania has been one of the principal contributors to the historical growth of landfill sites near rural and urban communities around Tasmania. The study of the effects of waste disposal on groundwater quality in Tasmania identified 176 waste disposal sites around Tasmania.

The number of landfill sites, together with the thinking of the times that the only consideration was that these sites should be located on the most economically marginal land, has created a legacy of environmental problems. Wetlands, bays and estuaries (e.g. New Town Bay, Lauderdale and the Huon), have all been used as long-term landfill sites. Historically, the risks of polluting groundwater, soil or air have rarely been considered when selecting sites and drawing up the engineering designs for Tasmanian waste disposal activities (Ezzy 2002, citing Gentizen 1990).

Implications

Landfill management and infrastructure

The availability of waste management infrastructure is an important factor influencing decisions to locate to Tasmania by industry. An ageing waste management infrastructure, as with other essential infrastructure such as energy and roads, can represent a significant disincentive to industry location and investment in the State. The provision and maintenance of waste management infrastructure is itself a major industry nationally. The ABS Survey of Environmental Protection Expenditure (ABS 1999) notes that waste management activities nationally comprised about 28% of total expenditure for environment protection ($2.4b in 1995-96 and $2.5b in 1996-97).

The establishment of best-practice solid waste management infrastructure directly benefits environmental and natural resource values and economic sectors dependent on the maintenance of those values.

Environmental implications of the landfill disposal route for solid waste depend on the number of sites, their location, the environmental controls operating at sites (such as hydrological conditions and site orientation), and the type of waste received. Environmental issues include the following.

• Several of the larger landfill sites around Tasmania were designed, and are currently operated, without liners to protect groundwater. The consequences for groundwater contamination are discussed below.
   
• The five largest landfill facilities in Tasmania are Glenorchy, Hobart, Dulverton, Port Latta and Launceston. A report commissioned by DPIWE identified a number of environmental management issues at these sites, with the most significant problems occurring at older sites in Launceston, Hobart and Glenorchy. Issues identified included: ineffective stormwater management in heavy rain events; insufficient number of monitoring bores in use; windblown litter; potential or actual discharge to the environment of leachate; intermittent direct discharge to environment or potential for discharge to environment (Nolan ITU 2001a).
   
• There are also a number of private landfill sites in Tasmania (Nolan ITU 1999). However, the operation of dedicated private landfills by industry has declined somewhat in recent years. For example, of the two industrial landfills that are by far the largest in Tasmania, one is in the process of being closed (the Brambles landfill at Mooreville Rd, Burnie which formerly received waste from Australian Paper) and volumes directed to the other are expected to decline significantly as material is redirected for composting (Norske Skog's private landfill). Norske Skog, Temco, Copper Mines of Tasmania, Pasminco Rosebery, Renison, Tasmanian Alkaloids, and Comalco all continue to operate landfills. With the exception of the Norske Skog landfill, annual tonnages disposed are very small in comparison with the larger municipal landfills. Historical landfills that are no longer used are known to exist at several industrial sites in Tasmania. These landfills exhibit varying degrees of assessment and remediation. Industries known to be operating their own landfills are listed in the table.
   

Effects of waste disposal on groundwater quality

The design of landfill facilities in response to site-specific hydrogeological characteristics determines the effects of waste disposal on groundwater quality. Pollution of groundwater resources is irreversible and has been recognised to be an issue of great concern. The study of the effects of waste disposal on groundwater quality identified groundwater contamination at 60% of the sites investigated. If this percentage is extrapolated to the 176 sites identified, potentially up to 100 waste disposal sites may have contaminated groundwater in Tasmania (Ezzy 2002).

Recycling infrastructure

An assessment of kerbside recycling in Australia to the National Packaging Council identified that the current kerbside system in metropolitan and regional centres provides a total net benefit to Australian communities (Nolan ITU, 2001b). The report notes that the inclusion of environmental benefits (expressed in dollar terms) together with current recycling and collection system costs provides an overall average benefit of $42 per household per year. This comprises an average net financial cost of $26 per household per year and an average environmental benefit of $68 per household per year. However, this overall national benefit masks some significant regional variations in the economics and environmental benefit of recycling.

The financial costs increase and the environmental benefits of kerbside recycling decrease as population density diminishes and the distance to markets increases. There is a need to assess the merits of kerbside recycling in regional areas with small towns and remote communities on a case-by-case basis. There will be areas in which kerbside is not viable. In these circumstances drop off systems are more appropriate (Nolan ITU, 2001b).

The environmental impact categories, which contribute to the overall benefit of current collection and recycling systems, were identified in the Nolan ITU report (2001b). These are presented in the following graph. This report identified that the majority of the benefits (75%) from kerbside recycling come from air and water pollution credits arising from the avoided product system associated with the avoided manufacture from virgin materials. The natural resource value of recycling is the next most influential factor at 21% of the benefit. This is followed by global warming credits, valued at 4%, and landfill savings at 1.6%. Traffic (including noise) represents a net environmental cost to the system of 2%.

Regional aspects

The study of the effects of waste disposal on Tasmanian groundwater quality identified 176 landfill sites across Tasmania (Ezzy 2002). The actual number of landfill sites, closed and currently operating, may be significantly greater than this. Knowing the number and location of these sites would be an important step in understanding the potential for contamination of regionally important groundwater resources.

Local government authorities are primarily responsible for waste disposal services in Tasmania. In 1999, Tasmanians were found to deposit approximately 489,000 tonnes of waste per year at municipal landfills. The northern region of Tasmania consists of eight municipalities that provided waste services to 133,229 people in 1999 with four providing waste collection and kerbside recycling. In the north-west region eight municipalities provided waste services to 109,063 people with seven councils providing waste collection and kerbside recycling. The southern region consists of twelve municipalities that provide waste services to 229,593 people, 10 of the councils provided waste collection and kerbside recycling (Nolan ITU 1999).

Materials collection services in 1999 involved:

• 22 waste collection services;
• 21 full kerbside recycling services;
• 2 paper and cardboard collection services;
• 1 green waste recycling collection service;
• 65 transfer stations;
• 43 landfills;
• 73 drop off depots; and
• 6 materials recycling facilities.

Assessing and measuring the current situation

Assessing and measuring how well the community is fairing in the management of solid waste is constrained by information gaps. However, information availability has improved in two main areas since the previous SoE Report (SDAC 1997). Firstly, DPIWE commissioned a study into disposal of solid waste at municipal landfill sites around Tasmania (Nolan ITU 1999). Secondly, a report has been prepared on contamination of groundwater from landfill sites (Ezzy 2002).

Some general statistics are known on solid waste disposal. For example, the per capita disposal rate for municipal waste in Australia is 620 kg/year, placing it second only to the USA while the per capita disposal of domestic waste in Australia was approximately 400 kg/year (Australian State of Environment Committee 2001). However, regional and trend comparisons are also very difficult because of different recording and survey methods. Further, there are many facets to the solid waste management problem that would benefit from improved information to better guide and direct policy, including:

• generation of waste by type and source;
• rates of recycling;
• generation of litter and understanding of impacts on the receiving environment (e.g. the marine environment where it can pose a threat to marine life);
• contamination of the environment through landfill sites (both current and former (contaminated) sites);
• consumer and manufacturer attitudes to waste; and
• volumes and impacts of particular solid waste streams that pose significant environmental costs such as tyres.

Sea dumping

The dumping of waste into the sea has a long history around Australia which has been documented by the Department of Environment and Heritage. The introduction of a new solution to jarosite dumping by the Pasminco-EZ smelter in Hobart brought to an end the last industrial dumping of waste to sea in Australia in 1997. There will be no further permits issued for industrial waste as such materials are now not permitted to be dumped under the London Convention. Scuttling or deliberately sinking ships at sea is another form of disposal. The Department of Environment and Heritage reports that many hundreds of obsolete vessels have been sea dumped or abandoned off Australia. Obsolete vessels have been scuttled in designated 'Graveyard' sites. The extent of use of the Tasmanian dumping site, located off the Tasman Peninsula, is unknown. However, 25 boats and ships including the Iron Baron are recorded in the register of boat dumping.

Indicators

This is a thumbnail version of the image contained in detail in 'continued-in-depth'.

Solid Waste Generation and Disposal - at a glance

• Continued in depth

• Information on waste received at Tasmanian municipal landfills each year should be available routinely (preferably annually) rather than be reliant on infrequent survey work. A continued reduction in landfill sites with an accompanying improvement in performance monitoring and reporting would greatly assist in the provision of this information. This information is needed to make better decisions about solid waste management and landfill in Tasmania.
   
• There has been a significant increase in the proportion of Tasmanian households that recycle, although participation in recycling remains slightly less than the national average. Kerbside recycling has strong community support in Tasmania. However, there is some evidence that it has a comparatively low environmental benefit relative to other States due to factors such as the distance between sorting facilities and reprocessing plants and participation and recovery rates for recycling (Nolan ITU 2001b).
   
• There are important demographic influences on the economic viability and environmental benefits of recycling in Tasmania. Tasmania's relatively dispersed population and lower population densities are factors that influence economic viability and environmental benefits from recycling.
   
• Waste disposal in Tasmania faces unprecedented pressure as waste quantities are increasing and the number of landfill sites needs to decrease in order to reduce the pressure on the environment from ageing waste management infrastructure. A number of landfill sites are relatively close to each other. These represent opportunities to further rationalise the number of landfill sites in Tasmania.
   

Management responses

• The National Waste Minimisation Strategy stated that a national coordinated approach to waste management was required and set a goal of 50% less waste going to landfill by 2000 based on 1990 per capita figures (Department of the Arts, Sport, Environment and Territories 1992). In March 2000 DPIWE released a public discussion paper entitled 'Towards a Tasmanian Waste Management Strategy'. The Government adopted a reduction target of 50% of waste by volume to landfill by 2005 based on 1990 levels. The Waste Management Strategy aims to provide an integrated approach to waste management through tools such as economic incentives, stakeholder participation, education and appropriate landfill sites (DPIWE 2000). The principles of waste avoidance and resource recovery have been included in the waste management strategy. A number of management tools such as the Environmental Management and Pollution Control Act 1994, litter management, new waste treatment technologies and the guidelines for medical waste, are to be reviewed as part of the Strategy (DPIWE 2000).
   
• DPIWE (2000) state that in conjunction with industry and regional waste management bodies they will develop community education campaigns to raise public awareness of waste avoidance, waste minimisation and recycling. A number of initiatives will be developed to promote public involvement in waste management. Community participation is required in Tasmania to reduce the amount of waste generated and improve the method of disposal. The 3 R's scheme involves promoting methods to Reduce, Re-use and Recycle.
   
• There are a number of policies, industry codes and guidelines that deal with waste management in Australia. The Environmental Code of Practice for Packaging and the ANZECC National Waste Minimisation and Purchasing Guidelines assist governments to develop and implement appropriate waste minimisation and purchasing strategies and policies in a consistent way (United Nations 2001).
   
• Methods of reducing waste can include cleaner production and life cycle assessment. Cleaner production involves reducing resource inputs and waste outputs in production, products and services. Cleaner production aims to make more efficient use of natural resources and reduce waste, pollution and risks to public health and safety at the source rather than at the end of the process (Environment Australia, 2000). The Australian Greenhouse Office states that significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and potential economic benefits can be gained from greater process efficiencies and waste minimisation and conversion. The National Greenhouse Strategy outlines methods to reduce methane emissions from landfill including addressing the policy, financial and structural barriers that prevent the widespread use of methane capture technology. The Strategy also outlines measures to ensure new waste landfill sites are equipped with methane capture and conversion facilities (AGO 2001).
   
• Life Cycle Assessment is the assessment of the environmental impact of options for making products or performing tasks over the complete life cycle of the product or task. Life Cycle Assessment involves examining all processes in the production of an item or providing a service. Processes can involve extraction and conversion of raw material, use of converted materials, use of a product and final disposal. Transport of energy and materials and construction of equipment may also need to be included. The International Standard ISO 14040, entitled LCA- Principles and Framework, was developed as part of the ISO 14000 series on environmental management (Evans and Ross 1998).
   
• There is no commercial exploitation of landfill gas in Tasmania. While attempts at commercial sale of landfill gas have occurred in Australia, obstacles such as resistance of sale of energy into the power grid and the inability to guarantee supply have hindered commercial utilisation of landfill gas. The use of biogas produced at landfill sites would result in a greenhouse benefit through reduced methane emissions (AGO 2001b).
   

Discussion

• While accurate data on waste production is difficult to obtain and estimates must be made, the information is adequate to highlight the need for action to improve solid waste management outcomes in Tasmania.
   
• A positive outcome of waste management is that there has been a considerable increase in the number of households involved in recycling and the amount of material recycled. Unfortunately, the kerbside recycling system in Tasmania is amongst the most marginal in Australia in relation to economic cost and environmental benefit (Nolan ITU 2001b). Low recovery rates per household, relatively lower population densities and distances to re-processing contribute to this situation.
   
• There is a strong case that limited financial resources in Tasmania should be directed as a priority towards rationalisation of landfill sites and improvement in their environmental performance. The potential for environmental gains from source reduction of waste, improved landfill management and residual waste treatment (stabilisation) can be equal or even outweigh environmental benefits achieved through recycling (Nolan ITU 2001b).
   
• There has been a reduction in the number of licenced landfill sites from 99 in 1994 to 43 in 1999, a further reduction in the number of sites is required to reduce the potential for environmental harm from landfill operations (Nolan ITU 2001b).
   
• A continuing reduction in the number of landfill sites and a shift towards waste transfer stations in Tasmania will also result in an increased ability to monitor and manage the sites. Fewer landfill sites results in less financial burden for the community in terms of land and manpower required managing the sites. A reduction in landfill sites will also reduce the pressure on the environment and issues such as leachate, vermin and odour can be limited to certain sites and management appropriately.
   

Future directions

There are a number of priority actions required in solid waste management. These include:

• implementing the recommendations of the report on the effects of waste disposal on groundwater quality (Ezzy 2002);
• developing regional waste management sites;
• Statewide integration of waste management with an accompanying improvement in performance monitoring and reporting;
• continuing rationalisation of landfill sites; and
• providing information on waste received at Tasmanian municipal landfills more regularly and consistently.

Tasmania Together and the RMPS

Relevant Tasmania Together goals and standards for issue reports within the Settlements chapter are listed in the linked file. The Tasmania Together Progress Board reported on progress toward targets for benchmarks set (Tasmania Together Progress Board 2003). Indicators, targets, baseline data and latest data are provided for the nine months to June 2003. Further information, including progress report updates, is available from Tasmania Together.

Involvement of the community, and the fair and orderly use of resources are also fundamental principles of the RMPS. The RMPS objectives have been developed to advance the principles of sustainable development.

Recommendations

Related issues