Technical options

Certain types of waste are actually seen as losses by their producers. No farmer wants to loose large amounts of relatively expensive pesticide or fertiliser into the adjacent rivers. No industry wants to loose its precious raw materials such as oil through spillage, or mercury through inefficient efforts at reclamation. These losses are inefficient and the introduction of better efficiency may be beneficial both to the industry and to the environment. Drives towards improving efficiency may be part of the natural process of industrial development, but in many cases may be further encouraged by incentives or by the imposition of punitive measures to make polluters pay.

Dispersant application from a C-130 Hercules airplane using an Aerial Dispersant Deployment System

Other types of waste include by-products which are clearly not wanted, ranging from CO2 to solid waste and toxic compounds. Even here there may be significant economic drivers to reducing waste production. No car driver wishes to spend more on fuel than they have to, and fuel efficiency has greatly increased in recent years. Legal and economic drivers can further encourage such technological shifts. Legislation in British Colombia, Canada required pulp mills to reduce, and eventually halt all releases of organochlorines from their liquid waste. Although not completed, initial efforts saw a reduction from an average of 10kg per air- dried tonne of pulp in the early 1990s to less than 1kg by the end of the decade. This industry remains highly competitive in world markets. Recycling is a critical tool for reduction of solid wastes, and technological changes are rapidly improving the efficacy and economic viability of recycling efforts.

Technical responses to the problems of waste are not always complex, nor costly. In many cases it is the application of improved knowledge and understanding, and the benefits can be massive.