|
Aug 21
|
Waste and pollution management approaches can be described as strategies. Solids control- drilling mud system is one part of it. At the municipal level these strategies traditionally have relied on disposal practices (predominantly landfilling and incineration), whereas industry has employed intermediate steps of treatment and stabilization of the more hazardous wastes.
Industry strategies are based on end-of-pipe treatment technologies, which are more appropriately referred to as control strategies, meaning their aim is really to control emissions and wastes to within legally allowable limits of discharge. Both strategies have two disadvantages:
1. They require ongoing costs that are associated with operations and maintenance and with use of energy, and they carry many hidden and indirect costs and liabilities.
2. Releases of infectious, toxic, and hazardous components to the environment continue for many years, posing long-term health risks to the public and endangerment to the environment simply because waste forms are only transformed and not entirely eliminated or completely immobilized.
Waste/pollution management strategies based on prevention strive to eradicate both of the above disadvantages because they eliminate the pollution or waste at the source. They tend to be only partially successful in reducing the first isadvantage because in a number of cases, P2 strategies rely on technology investments which have OM&R (operation, maintenance, and repair costs) as well as other ongoing costs (e.g., labor, energy). But in general, when properly implemented, they are more cost effective than disposal and treatment technologies. Minimization strategies tend to reduce the risks associated with the second disadvantage, but may also offset some of the costs and liabilities noted with the first disadvantage. Continue reading »
