Current Waste Management Techniques, the Environmental Impact of Those Techniques and Suggestions for Improvement

A study into the impact of Waste Management in Dohuk, Iraq and Iraqi Kurdistan

Introduction
The northern region of Iraq is known as Iraqi Kurdistan. Long has it been the vacations spot of the various leaders and kings that have ruled the surrounding land. The mountains of Kurdistan offer a cool respite from the summer heat below, and the gently running streams gurgle their way through their chiseled paths in Kurdistan’s ruggedly beautiful landscape. Yet this beauty is under attack. Imagine a not to distant future where the Kurdish people are driven from their lands, not by a ruthless dictator or warring tribes. Instead they will be kicked out by something so small it can only be seen under a microscope. This is Kurdistan’s future unless they act now.

You do not have to walk far in Kurdistan anymore to see the evidence of environmental pollution. Every lake and stream is polluted with strewn garbage. Plastic bags are caught in trees, and broken glass seems to litter every gathering place in the country. During the day you can see the smoke of garbage fires releasing toxins into the air as the people burn plastics, cardboard, household filth, and biodegradable waste. Inside the cities the streets are choked with filth strewn everywhere. When you ask the people why they do not care about keeping their city clean, they always ask “why should we care.”

That is an excellent question. Why should someone care about keeping their city clean when there is no continuous power, when the average wage is only $100 per month, when there are more college graduates then jobs and the majority of those jobs are in government offices, and when 18 year old soldiers make more money then university professors. Why should they care?

Effects of Improper Waste Remediation
Over the past several decades, major changes in waste composition have taken place with the introduction of synthetic products and packaging derived from hydrocarbons and chlorine including plastics, solvent, bleach or pesticides. Recent regulations ban hazardous substances and waste dangerous goods but many of these toxic materials are found at municipal waste disposal grounds as either components of packaging, household cleaning products or products. These materials may represent a much greater danger to public health and the environment than common materials found in household waste

Burned under conditions found in burning barrels or waste disposal grounds such as low temperature ranges (250 C to 700 C), oxygen-starved conditions and the presence of hydrochloric acid or chlorine, mixed garbage will produce several different air toxics. These include total dioxins and furans, total volatile organic compounds measured as methane, air toxics, metals including antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese, mercury, phosphorus and titanium, particulate matter (PM), hydrogen chloride (HCl), carbon monoxide (CO) and oxides of sulfur and nitrogen.

Burning activities at waste disposal grounds affects several groups of people associated with the site's activities. These include users of the waste disposal ground, maintenance people, local area residents, businesses, land owners and possibly children who may be attracted to the site especially if it is close to a community. In Iraqi-Kurdistan waste disposal grounds are located a short distance from the communities they serve. The growth of these cities is causing encroachment on existing waste disposal grounds establishing many concerns for the populace in those towns.

It is difficult to determine the exact emissions at each site due to the many variables affecting the burn. The time of year, climate (wind and ambient temperature), type of community (urban, rural or recreational), compactness of the refuse pile, moisture content and available recycling opportunities affect the household waste composition and the chemical compounds in resulting pollutants when they are burned. The relatively low temperatures associated with open burning increase emissions of particulates, carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons. Sulfur oxide emissions are a function of the refuse's sulfur content.

Common Forms of Airborne Pollutants from burning Trash
There are many pollutants that are released with burning a community’s trash. Particulate matter is the general term for particles of soot and dust in the atmosphere. Particulates are composed of organic matter and compounds containing sulfur, nitrogen and metals. These particles may be inhaled and irritate the respiratory system and prolonged inhalation may increase the number and severity of chronic respiratory disease cases.

Sulfur oxides may be released if refuse being burned contains sulfur compounds. Studies of serious air pollution occasions found an increase in mortalities among people with existing heart and lung disease. Even when concentrations are below what may be considered serious; there may be a noticeable increase in acute and chronic respiratory disease cases. Healthy people may experience sore throats, shortness of breath and breathing difficulties. Sulfur oxides can cause vegetation damage, corrode many materials and contribute to acid rain.

Carbon monoxide is a common pollutant which may be released from the incomplete combustion of municipal waste. This compound binds chemically to the hemoglobin in the blood stream, the substance which carries oxygen to the heart, brain and other body tissues. Exposure to carbon monoxide causes dizziness, headaches, slowed reflexes and reduces the ability to perform physical exercise. Even at relatively low concentrations, carbon monoxide can affect mental function, visual acuity and alertness.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) refers to a large group of compounds which may be released during the incomplete burning in municipal landfills of almost any kind of organic material including fats, meat, coffee, rubber and other material. Many VOCs are known to have direct toxic effects on humans, ranging from cancer risks to nervous system disorders. VOCs also contribute to the formation of ground level ozone (smog). Elevated ozone levels have been shown to cause adverse health effects on the human respiratory system and are strongly suspected of playing a role in the long term development of chronic lung disease. Ozone effects on vegetation damage are well documented with millions of dollars estimated in crop damage in certain areas of Canada due to elevated ozone levels.

Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), which are VOCs, are the primary contributors to stratospheric ozone level depletion and are involved in the global warming effect.

Nitrogen Oxides (NO) may be released in the open burning of municipal refuse. Certain nitrogen compounds may cause adverse health effects to the human respiratory system. The primary concerns with NO emissions are their contribution to the formation of ground level ozone and acid rain. To a lesser extent, some NO compounds contribute to stratospheric ozone layer depletion and global warming.

Health and Environmental Conditions of Pollutants
With all of these pollutants from burning there are significant environmental and health effects. The Particulate Matter causes Irritation of respiratory tract, aggravated asthma, and contributes to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The environmental effects are increased toxic loading on the environment, and lead to contaminated water/land and affects animal health.

Sulfur oxides cause Increase in heart/lung disease, acute/chronic respiratory disease. Healthy people experience shortness of breath, sore throats, and breathing difficulties. Environmentally sulfur oxide causes vegetative damage, corrodes many materials, and contributes to acid rain (forests, aquatic and urban environments i.e. structures).

Carbon Monoxide causes dizziness, headaches and slowed reflexes, affects mental function, visual acuity and alertness. Environmentally it oxidizes to carbon dioxide (which is a greenhouse gas) in the atmosphere.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) is directly toxic this includes problems ranging from cancer risks to nervous disorders, causes respiratory irritation/illness, chronic lung disease. Environmentally VOC contributes to low level ozone (smog), causes vegetative damage. Leads to contaminated water/land, and affects animal health.

Nitrogen Oxides causes respiratory illness, fluid collection in the lungs and fibrotic changes. Environmentally Nitrogen Oxide contributes to acid rain and ozone formation.

Polynuclear Hydrocarbons may cause cancer. Environmentally they increase toxic loading on the environment, lead to contaminated water/land, and affects animal health.

Aldehydes cause eye and respiratory tract irritation, and headaches. It is also an animal carcinogen. Environmentally it leads to increased toxic loading on the environment, leads to contaminated water/land, and affects animal health.

Dioxins and Furans may cause cancer, causes growth defects, affects DNA, and affects immune and reproductive systems. Environmentally they increase toxic loading on the environment, leads to contaminated water/land, and affects animal health.

Heavy Metals (such as Mercury) are highly toxic. Heavy metals collect in the human system until a lethal dosage is reached this causes respiratory/intestinal problems. Environmentally they increase the toxic loading on the environment, lead to contaminated water/land, and affects animal health.

Hydrochloric Acid causes irritation of the respiratory tract, respiratory illness, and dulls the body's senses. Environmentally increase toxic loading on the environment, leads to contaminated water and land, and affects animal health.

Hydrogen Sulfide (H S) is toxic causing respiratory disease. In healthy people they experience shortness of breath, sore throats, breathing difficulties, and irritated eyes. Environmentally it contributes to acid rain, may damage vegetation, and causes offensive odors.
Integrated Waste Management

In order to handle growing volumes of wastes, the proper policies need to be enacted and implemented. The approach to waste management regarded as the most compatible with an environmentally sustainable development is called “Integrated Waste Management.” This approach consists of a hierarchical and coordinated set of actions that reduces pollution, seeks to maximize recovery of reusable and recyclable materials, and protects human health and the environment. Integrated Waste Management aims to be socially desirable, economically viable and environmentally sound. The Integrated Waste Management approach can be adapted to the specific conditions evident in Dohuk and Kurdistan.

Waste Prevention
Waste prevention is given the highest priority in Integrated Waste Management. This is a preventive action that seeks to reduce the amount of waste that individuals, businesses and other organizations generate. By not creating waste, fewer collection vehicles and a fewer number of refuse collectors would be needed; fewer and smaller waste handling facilities would be required, and it would extend the life of the landfills. Society as a whole would be benefited from a successful implementation of a waste prevention program. There are several ways in which waste generation can be prevented:

· By enacting public policies that discourage the production, sale and consumption of products containing unnecessary packaging material

· By enacting public policies that discourage the production, sale and consumption of disposable products

· By enacting public policies that encourage the production, sale and consumption of reusable or recyclable products

· By enacting public policies that encourage the production, sale and consumption of long-lasting products (which do not have to be discarded often)

· By enacting public policies that promote the consumption of large-size products. The amount of packaging material –plastics, glass or metal– needed to contain a kilogram or liter of a product decreases as the size of a product increases. In other words, larger bottles and containers require less material per unit of product than smaller ones. When they are discarded, it results in less waste that needs to be collected, transported and disposed of

· By enacting public policies that encourage the production, sale and consumption of repairable products (that do not have to be discarded when they malfunction)

· By minimizing the weight of products. Public policies could encourage the production, sale and consumption of light-weight products (which, when discarded, would result in a reduction of the weight of the waste to be collected, transported and disposed of)

Reuse
Once the waste prevention program has been implemented, the next priority in an Integrated Waste Management approach is promoting the reuse of products and materials.
Reuse consists in the recovery of items to be used again, perhaps after some cleaning and refurbishing. Reusing materials and products saves energy and water, reduces pollution, and lessens society’s consumption of natural resources compared to the use of single-use products and materials.

Reuse of materials and products is regarded as more socially desirable than recycling the same materials. Beverage bottles –soda or beer bottles– can be disposable, returnable (reusable) or recyclable. Reusable bottles have the lowest environmental impact of the three, while disposable bottles require the most energy, water and generate the largest amount of waste and pollution.
Even though private companies have created reuse programs on their own, if public policies existed to promote it, reuse could dramatically increase. Public policies that provide incentives for businesses and individuals to engage in reuse can have a significant and positive economic and environmental impact.

Recycling
After the reuse of materials and products, recycling comes next in the Integrated Waste Management hierarchy. Recycling is the recovery of materials for melting them, re-pulping them and reincorporating them as raw materials. It is technically feasible to recycle a large amount of materials, such as plastics, wood, metals, glass, textiles, paper, cardboard, rubber, ceramics, and leather. Demand determines the types and amounts of materials that are recycled in a particular region.

Recycling can render social, economic, and environmental benefits. It provides an income to the scavengers who recover recyclable materials. Factories that consume recyclable materials can be built for a fraction of the cost of building plants that consume virgin materials. Recycling saves energy, water, and generates less pollution than obtaining virgin raw materials, which translates into lower operating costs. Recycling also reduces the amount of wastes that need to be collected, transported and disposed of, and extends the life of disposal facilities, which saves money to the municipalities. Recycling can result in a more competitive economy and a cleaner environment, and can contribute to a more sustainable development.

Recycling can be conducted in a number of ways. In the developed world, municipalities have created recycling programs, which usually involve separation of recyclable materials at the source of generation. In this type of programs, individuals and businesses separate their recyclable materials in a different container and before they are mixed with the rest of their garbage. The materials commonly separated at the source include metals, glass, paper and plastics. The cleaner and the more homogeneous a material is, the higher the price industry is willing to pay for it. Therefore, source separation is preferable to salvaging materials from mixed wastes.

Material Recovery Facilities have been used in some developed countries. Material Recovery Facilities are plants where recyclables are recovered sorted and processed for sale to industry. They can either process source-separated recyclables from a recycling program, or mixed wastes the way they are collected from residential and other sources. Material Recovery Facilities typically use different types of magnetic and pneumatic equipment, as well as conveyor belts and human sorters to classify the recyclable materials.

In the developing world, municipalities usually lack recycling programs. That does not mean, however, that recycling does not exist. Informal recycling is common throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America. Scavengers carry out the bulk of recycling of municipal wastes. Scavengers salvage recyclable materials on the streets, before collection crews arrive, at communal refuse dumpsters, at illegal open dumps, as well as at municipal open dumps and landfills.

Scavenging could provide an income to unemployed individuals, recent migrants who have been unable to find employment in the formal sector, women, children, and elderly individuals.

Incineration
In an Integrated Waste Management approach, incineration occupies the next to last priority, after waste prevention, reuse, and recycling have been undertaken. Incineration is the burning of wastes under controlled conditions, usually carried out in an enclosed structure. Incineration may include energy recovery.

Experience with incineration in developing countries has been mostly negative. Incinerators built in Africa, Asia and Latin America did not function as promised. In Lagos, Nigeria, incinerators were built at a cost of U.S. $ 10 million. The moisture content of wastes was so high that fuel had to be added to maintain combustion, which increased costs significantly. The incinerators never operated normally, one was abandoned and the other turned into a community center. Similar experiences have been observed in India, Mexico, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Turkey. Therefore, incineration of municipal waste is likely to fail in Dohuk and cause physical and environmental hazards.

Sanitary Landfills
Final disposal of wastes at sanitary landfills is given the lowest priority in an Integrated Waste Management approach. A sanitary landfill is a facility designed specifically for the final disposal of wastes that minimizes the risks to human health and the environment associated with solid wastes. Sanitary landfills commonly include one, two or three different liners at the bottom and sides of the disposal area, in order to prevent leachates from polluting nearby surface waters or aquifers. Liners also prevent the underground movement of methane. Waste arriving at landfills is compacted and then covered with a layer of earth, usually every day. This prevents animals from having access to the organic matter to feed. Sanitary landfills may also include other pollution control measures, such as collection and treatment of leachate, and venting or flaring of methane.

It is possible to produce electricity by burning the methane that landfills generate. Extending the life of landfills and diverting as much as possible by waste prevention, reuse, recycling and composting can make economic sense. Diverting materials from landfills can also create jobs, reduce poverty, improve economic competitiveness, reduce pollution and conserve natural resources.

Sanitary landfills are necessary for final disposal of the wastes that could not be prevented, reused, recycled or composted. Ideally, sanitary landfills should be used primarily for non-reusable, non-recyclable and non-compostable residues. Sanitary landfills constitute a dramatic improvement over disposal of wastes in open dumps. Sanitary landfills greatly reduce pollution and risks to human health and the environment compared to open dumping.
Ways to pay for Municipal Garbage Collection

Providing municipal waste collection services is a problem all over the world. This problem is amplified in developing countries like Iraq and especially Kurdistan. Due to low economic backing and limited knowledge on waste remediation techniques these problems are again amplified. One possible solution to these problems is privatization of waste collection services. This will allow better service and improved environmental conditions as well as introducing foreign investment into the municipal equation. Bringing in outside investors and waste remediation companies will also bring in outside knowledge and expertise.
According to a field study by the World Bank and others, “the private delivery of municipal solid waste services can be successful in terms of greater efficiency, coverage and quality of service. Keys to successful private sector involvement in municipal solid waste management include creating contestable markets, establishing an appropriate regulatory framework and operations standards for contractors, and strengthening local government capacity to negotiate contracts and monitor performance. In the simplest terms, the focus must be on competition, transparency, and accountability.” This study is available for use by any municipality and covers many of the issues faced with privatization.

Even when services are provided by a private entity the local and central government is still responsible for ensuring proper collection and disposal and municipal waste. The government can mitigate duties and roles but never the responsibility.

Through establishing proper zones inside of a city and a privatization program a local government can ensure that waste collection and remediation services are provided to their citizens while promoting better business and protecting the environment. For this to happen their must be cooperation and collaboration between the private industry sector and the government. Oversight must be provided to ensure the private sector is meeting all established requirements and the government must provide contracts of adequate length to ensure profit margins will allow for proper remediation techniques to be implemented.

Summary
In Dohuk and Iraqi Kurdistan current waste collection and remediation techniques are inadequate leading to several environmental and health problems and concerns. If left unresolved, this problem will only grow until it is no longer fixable. Even with this scenario a possibility Dohuk and Iraqi Kurdistan can still change. Through a more aggressive public policy and introduction of privatized services Dohuk can ensure the health of their people and their environment for generations to come.





References
Martin Medina. Globalization, Development, and Municipal Solid Waste
Management in Third World Cities. El Colegio de la Frontera Norte, Tijuana, Mexico
Southern African Nature Foundation, Enviro Facts
Jorge Enrique Hardoy, Diana Mitlin, David Satterthwaite. Environmental Problems in Third World Cities.
Dr.M. R. M. Crul and J. C. Diehl. (2006). Design for Sustainability (D4S): a Practical Approach for Developing Economies.
UNEP. (2007). GEO Year Book 2007. ISBN No: 978-92-807-2786-9
Plastics Europe, Pastics and Environment, http://www.plasticseurope.org/content/default.asp?PageID=94
Abad, R. (1991). Squatting and Scavenging in Smokey Mountain. Ateneo de Manila: Philippine Studies. 39: 267-285.
Anon. (1992). The Jakarta Post. September 22: 3.
Anon. (1982). La Basura y el Medio Ambiente. Premio Serfin al Medio Ambiente. Mexico City: mimeo.
Bartone, C. (1988). The Value in Wastes. Decade Watch. September: 3-4.
Brown, L. and J Jacobson. (1987). The Future of Urbanization: Facing the Ecological and Economic Constraints. Worldwatch Paper 77. Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute.
Castillo, H. (1990). La Sociedad de la Basura: Caciquismo Urbano en la Ciudad de México. Second Edition. Mexico City: UNAM.
Cointreau, S. and M. de Kaadt. (1991). Living with Garbage: Cities Learn to Recycle. Development Forum, Jan-Feb: 12-13.
Cointreau, S. (1982). Environmental Management of Solid Wastes in Developing Countries. Washington, DC: The World Bank.
Chapin, Ch. (1995). The Rag-pickers of Pune. The UNESCO Courier. March: 18-19.
Durning, A. (1989). Action at the Grassroots: Fighting Poverty and Environmental Decline. Worldwatch Paper 88. Washington, DC: Worldwatch Institute.
Fundación Social. (1991). Tecnología, Diseño Industrial y Factores Humanos en el Reciclaje de Basuras. Bogotá: Fundación Social-Programa Nacional de Reciclaje.
Fundación Social. (1990). Memorias del Primer Encuentro Nacional de Recicladores. Bogotá: Fundación Social-Programa Nacional de Reciclaje.
Furedy, Ch. (1991). Social Aspects of Solid Waste Recovery in Asian Cities. Environmental Sanitation Reviews. 30. Bangkok: Environmental Sanitation Center.
Furedy, Ch. (1984). Resource-Conserving Traditions and Waste Disposal: The Garbage Farms and Sewage-Fed Fisheries of Calcutta. Conservation & Recycling. 7: 181-190.
Gonzalez, J., M. Cadena and M. Suremain. (1993). Estudio Sobre los Circuitos de Reciclaje de Desechos Sólidos en la Ciudad de Bogotá. Bogotá: ENDA America Latina: 45-67.
Guibbert, J. (ed.). (1988). Saneamiento Alternativo o Alternativas al Saneamiento. Bogotá: ENDA América Latina.
Herrera, J. (1995). Pepenadores de todo en la basura. Excelsior. Mexico City. May 22.
Holmes, J. (1984). Solid Waste Management Decisions in Developing Countries. In Holmes, J. (ed.) Managing Solid Wastes in Developing Countries. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Jaramillo, G. (1991). Cooperativa Recuperar: De Basuriegos a Empresarios. In Trabajando Con Desechos: Experiencias Colombianas. Bogotá: Fondo Rotatorio Editorial.
Kirov, N. (1982). General Overview of Waste Management Practices and Needs in Developing Countries. In J. Thome-Kosmienzky (ed.) Recycling in Developing Countries. Berlin: Freitag: 34-47.
Kresse, K. and J. Ringeltaube. (1982). How Resource Recovery and Appropriate Technologies Can Cut Costs of Waste Management in Developing Countries. In J. Thome-Kosmienzky (ed.) Recycling in Developing Countries. Berlin: Freitag.
Lohani, B. and J. Baldisimo. (1990). Foille et tri a Manille. Dakar, Senegal: Environnement Africain. 29-30: 181-190.
Maynez, S. (1988). El Reino de la Basura. Proceso. 587. Mexico City.
Medina, M. (1998). Scavenger Cooperatives in Developing Countries. BioCycle, June: 70-72.
Medina, M. (1997). Scavenging on the Border: A Study of the Informal Recycling Sector in Laredo, Texas, and Nuevo Laredo, Mexico. Ph. D. Dissertation, Yale University.
Medina, M. (1997). The Effect of Income on Municipal Solid Waste Generation Rates for Countries of Varying Levels of Economic Development: A Model. Journal of Solid Waste Technology & Management. August: 149-155.
Medina, M. (1997). Informal Recycling and Collection of Solid Wastes in Developing Countries: Issues and Opportunities. Tokyo: United Nations University / Institute of Advanced Studies Working Paper No. 24.
Medina, M. (1997). Supporting Scavenger Coops in Colombia. BioCycle. June: 45-47.
Medina, M. (1993). Recovery of Recyclables in Mexico City. Urban Issues. New Haven: Urban Resources Institute: 17-18.
Medina, M. (1993). 1993a. Collecting Recyclables in Metro Manila. BioCycle. June: 51-53.
Mendoza, G. (1983). Contaminación por Desechos Sólidos en el D.F. Mexico City: IPN: 78.
Meyer, G. (1987). Waste Recycling as a Livelihood in the Informal Sector- The Example of Refuse Collectors in Cairo. Applied Geography and Development; 30: 78-94.
Ouano, E. (1991). Developing Appropriate Technology for Solid Waste Management in Developing Countries: Metro Manila Pilot as a Case Study. International Expert
Group Seminar on Policy Responses Towards Improving Solid Waste Management in Asian Metropolises. Bandung, Indonesia, February 4-8: 13.
PCI. (1988). The Study on Solid Waste Management for Metro Manila in the Republic of the Philippines. Tokyo: Pacific Consultants International.
Phatak, P. (1993). Urbanisation, Poverty and Environmental Considerations: A Micro-Level
Perspective. In V. Agnihotri (ed.) Environment and Development. New Delhi: Concept Publishing Co.
Phillips, D. and I. Restrepo. (1984). El Proyecto Basura. American Behavioral Scientist. 8.
Salazar, J. (1995). Serán Construídos 13 Rellenos Sanitarios Más en la República. Excelsior. June 22. Mexico City.
Tonon, F. (1990). Gestion des Ordures Ménagères à Cotonou. Environnement Africain. 29-30: 79-92.
UNCHS. (1989). Refuse Collection Vehicles for Developing Countries. Nairobi, Kenya: United Nations Centre for Human Settlements.
Vogler, J. (1984). Waste Recycling in Developing Countries: A Review of the Social, Technological, and Market Forces. In Holmes, (ed.) Managing Solid Wastes in Developing Countries. New York: John Wiley & Sons: 244.
Wells, Ch. (1995). Managing Solid Wastes in Brazil. BioCycle. June: 53.
Sandra Cointreau-Levine and Adrian Coad. (2000). Private sector participation in municipal solid waste management.
http://rru.worldbank.org/Documents/Toolkits/waste_fulltoolkit.pdf