Detailed Review of Selected Non-Incineration and Incineration POPs Elimination Technologies for the CEE Region – 4 Requirements for POPs elimination technologies

Detailed Review of Selected Non-Incineration and Incineration POPs Elimination Technologies for the CEE Region

4 Requirements for POPs elimination technologies

4.1 International requirements
4.2 Regional and national requirements

4.1 International requirements

For decades hazardous chemicals have either been disposed off in landfills and/or eliminated mainly by incineration based technologies. Increasing awareness of chemical impact on the environment, humans and biota during the 1990ies initiated in mid 1990ies international initiatives for preparation of an international environmental binding convention on selected hazardous substances. In May 2001, the Stockholm Convention (SC) on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) was decided and open for signature, subsequently ratification. The SC is the first step towards an international agreement on successive restricted use, ultimately banning of the most harmful chemical substances.

One of the consequences of the SC is the preparation of National Implementation Plans outlining a number of institutional, technical and financial aspects of POPs waste management. A critical aspect hereof, is the attitude, ability and national/regional perception of what is “environmentally sound elimination of POPs”.

The SC processes the issue in a two-fold manner; by making definition in the convention text of the Best Available Technique (BAT) and the principles of Best Environmental Practise (BEP) and by initiating a long pre-conventional discussion amongst key stakeholders to the convention of this critical element recognising the needed time to develop a sustainable foundation for the conventional statement. The SC furthermore clearly distinguishes between reduction/elimination of unintentional releases and reduction/elimination of stockpiles and wastes.

The conclusions from the SC process can be summarised as:

SC defines the wording BAT as the most effective and accessible technique for providing the basis for release limitations. Both in achieving a high level of protection of the environment in general, but it is also developed to a certain commercial scale that allows implementation under economically and technically viable conditions. However, simultaneously recognising where this achievement is not practicable enforceable, generally to reduce releases and their impact on the environment as a whole;
SC defines the wording BEP as the optimum result of a process involving the combination of environmental control measures and strategies.

The above conventional wording for BEP can be interpreted as a number of basic principles like use of low-waste technologies, less hazardous substances, promotion of the recovery and recycling of waste and of substances generated and used in the process, replacement of feed materials which are characterised as POPs or where a direct link between the materials and releases of POPs from the source, good housekeeping and preventive maintenance programmes. All, which must be assessed and national imprints made in the preparatory work for the National Implementation Plan under the Stockholm Convention. Interpretation of the SC wording for BAT is of key interest for this project. Initially, the SC wording on BAT need to be further elaborated by both the Conference of Parties and the Interim Secretariat for the Stockholm Convention, although strong perception requirements are highlighted in the SC text. These include:

A number of general conditions: national POPs characteristics, commissioning of existing and/or new techniques, time for implementation, consumption of raw material, efficiency etc, POPs mass flow characteristic, risks for accidents, humans, environment etc, technology advances, national strategies and abilities (technical, financial etc);
A number of release reduction measures (preferences to new technology, assessment of existing facilities within areas like retrofitting, residues, open/close systems etc).

Most of the countries in the CEE Region have become Parties to the Basel Convention. One of the main objectives of the Basel Convention is to encourage countries to reduce production of hazardous waste and thereby reduce needs for transboundary transport of such waste. The Basel Convention states “Recognising also the increasing desire for the prohibition of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal in other States, especially developing countries” and thereby supporting the principle of handling of own produced waste.

The above requirements related to e.g. the SC and Basel Convention ratification, emphasise the difficulties that many countries in the CEE Region and elsewhere are facing. However, the recognised baseline is the national characteristics of the POPs and other hazardous chemicals. In Section 3.2, an estimate of the amount of stockpiled and waste POPs/OPs is outlined as baseline data considerations related to both BAT and BEP perceptions in the CEE Region.

Focussing on the CEE Region, baseline data from Section 3.1 and outlined international requirements are reflected in the final choice of technology review criteria, which are considered relevant for the CEE Region. Some of these are of more generic character and can eventually find use in other global regions, but many are of generic character for the CEE Region. These are strongly related to both national/regional characteristics within institutional setting, POPs characteristics and financial/structural conditions as well as technical abilities, skill level, occupational health conditions and abilities to operate highly technological facilities.

Chapter 6 outlines the final selected review criteria for the CEE Region in further details. The final review criteria have been selected based upon:

A wish to create an overview rather than further “confusion” among in-line experts, specialists, vendors, NGOs and policy makers;
Covering the aspects of technical, economic, environmental and risk related items, which are considered as the main elements of a good, consistent and in-depth review on POPs elimination technologies;
Drawn-up highlights of CEE Regional specific POPs problem related to cultural, regulatory and institutional differences within the region;
Liaison with International and Regional recognised POPs problem of the region, outlined in various presentation papers, workshops, conferences and national contacts through existing projects.

4.2 Regional and national requirements

4.2.1 Regional requirements

The EU countries have signed the Stockholm Convention and will therefore be obliged to follow the rules spelled out here (reference to Regulation no. 850/2004 of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 on POPs and Amending Directive 79/117/EEC). Concerning the pesticides DDT, Aldrin, Dieldrin, Endrin, Chlordane, Heptachlor, Hexachlorbenzene, Mirex and Toxaphene, EU countries have either already banned the use or will have to do so shortly. This most likely in combination with a general discussion about which pesticides can be accepted in Annex 1 to the EU-Directive 91/414 "Council Directive 91/414/EEC of 15 July 1991 concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market".

Concerning the destruction of POPs, this has already been ruled for in the EU-requirements waste elimination (EU-Directive 2000/76/EC on the Incineration of Waste). Herein are also rules on how to avoid the emission of dioxins and furans.

On the disposal of PXB/PCT, EU has made a special directive, the EU-Directive 96/59 of 16 September 1996 on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and terphenyls (PCB/PCT).

According to the EU Directive 2001/42/EC of 27 June 2001 (assessment of the effect of certain plans and programmes on the environment), the EU member states have to introduce the legal, regulatory and administrative mechanisms for implementation of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of plans and programmes developed for various sectors including the waste management by 21 July 2004.

The planning process establishing national elimination capacity is supported by the EU-directives on EIA (although only mandatory for larger scale facilities) and IPPC (obtainment of operational permission). Prior to these, a pre-EIA phase will normally include a site selection process into which the EIA procedure and assessment will factor in site specific information. Implementing both the EIA and IPPC procedures requires public hearings allowing public access to key technical and environmental assessment data. Furthermore, the IPPC regulation will stipulate under which mandatory conditions the facility can operate.

Furthermore, the EU Seveso II Directive must be built into the overall planning process. In many countries OPs/POPs are centrally stored evitable posing a high risk for uncontrolled impact in case of e.g. fire. The Seveso II Directive, amended 26 September 2002 highlights possible applicability and further development of e.g. safety reports depending on assessment, characterisation and classification of actual stored chemicals.

All the new EU member states have to incorporate a substantial regulatory framework. With identified restricted capacity in e.g. environmental institutions, the assessed abilities of the competent authorities approving e.g. the establishment of national elimination capacity, could decrease and slow down the development due to extensive new regulations and general transformation of the societies. However, how the impact from signed international environmental legal binding conventions will interact with more immediate needs provided and generated through a soon need for sustainable national systems for hazardous waste stream, is uncertain but must be monitored.

4.2.2 National requirements

The national requirements related to POPs elimination technologies in the CEE countries are determined either by the EU directives (for the new EU members) or by the legislative context historically developed in the CIS in view of obligations under the international conventions (e.g. Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, Geneva, UN/ECE 1991).

The major set of national requirements for a project on elimination of POPs in CEE countries is covered by the procedure of the National Environmental Expertise, including the EIA (with public hearings) as one of the components. There is also bilateral agreement on the international environmental expertise within the CIS.

Basically, the POPs elimination activities in CEE could be performed in 2 ways: (1) by construction of a new facility, (2) upgrading of an existing facility. In any case, the project documentation has to pass the environmental expertise and an enterprise starting activities for elimination of POPs should apply from the relevant authorities, the permits for use of resources (e.g. land, water, energy) and for emissions (air emissions, discharge of wastewater and management of solid waste) and for other types of impact (e.g. noise, electromagnetic fields) analogue to EU-framework for e.g. IPPC permission.

The legal and administrative framework for the environmental protection provides a background for the compensation of impact resulting from an activity. Several CEE countries are currently introducing environmental insurance, which is seen as one of the mechanism of raising funds for possible damage to the public and the environment.

Nevertheless, looking into e.g. European past history on the establishment of national elimination capacity, the CEE Region will have to promote these historical anchored processes into a one-step process. This is why many CEE countries show obvious reluctance entering in the field of capital investment for national elimination capacity. Resources are restricted, environmental goals many and with the present level of political instability, still limited experiences with democratic ruling, such investment projects have been prioritised, but not on the top list. In the future, the outline picture will change due to increased pressure from the international community, NGO organisations, industries (providence of appropriate infrastructure - e.g. handling of hazardous residuals from production) and public interest (recognition of the fact that systems are needed).

In Chapter 5, the report further elaborates on the "conflict of interest", between the technical wishes, assessed results and the economic incentives to perform capital investment. A combined solution is needed for implementing any new elimination activities in the CEE Region on a commercial scale. Alternatively, the initiate on the establishment of national elimination capacity is highly depending on bilateral aid programmes as seen in Poland, Latvia and Slovakia. However, these bilateral programmes will soon phase out due to EU membership and be replaced by structural funds (cohesion funds) provided for by EU, although one could fear a repetition in a larger context, that the issue will fall in priority due to larger scale problems as for example turnaround of the industrial sector, infrastructure investments etc.