Login

A DEBATE FORMAT ON 

WASTE MANAGEMENT?
 
NO LINKS PLEEE

  •  A lot of solid waste is generated from homes, offices, hospitals, schools etc. All this waste is collected and disposed by the municipality.
  • Solid waste can be categorized into two types - biodegradable and non-biodegradable.
  • Biodegradable substances can be broken down into simpler,harmless substances in nature with due course of time by the biological process such as action of microbes. They can be recycled as a part of food chain. Paper, wood, cloth, sewage,oil pollutants, cattle dung, domestic waste are some of the examples.
  • Non-biodegradable waste: It includes wastes such as plastic, metal, broken glass etc., which cannot be broken down by living organisms.
 
Difference between Biodegradable and non biodegradable wastes:
 
Bio degradable waste  Non bio degradable waste 
1. The wastes decompose naturally in the environment. The wastes do not decompose naturally.
2. They are safe for the environment. They are harmful to the environment create pollution.
3. The wastes are made up of natural ingredients. The wastes are made up of synthetic materials.
4. They can be constantly reused. They cannot be recycled.
Example – waste papers, wood crumbles. Example – plastic bags, cans, disposable bottles.
 
The advantages of waste management:
  • Reduce Poverty
  • Improve Industrial Competitiveness
  • Save Cities Collection, Transportation and disposal Costs
  • Create Jobs
  • Conserve Natural Resources
  • Extend the Life of Disposal Sites
  • Protect the Environment
 

  • 0
View Full Answer

 

Every year EESG hosts a free event just before Christmas.  On 2ndDecember 2013 this took the form of a debate on the sustainability of the engineering solutions for nuclear waste management.

The debate format was chosen to enable different perspectives on this difficult subject to be presented together, while retaining the focus on the key requirement of sustainability to not compromise the ability of future generations to meet their needs, as defined by the UN Brundtland Commission. It was also intended to bring forward data and engineering arguments on sustainability, rather than personal positions in favour of or against the concept of nuclear power, and to secure an independent output by allowing an audience to vote.

The motion formulated by the Board of EESG was “This house believes that the engineering solutions in place for nuclear waste management effectively ensure that the ability of future generations to meet their needs will not be compromised”. It was proposed by Bruce McKirdy, Managing Director of the UK’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authorities  (NDA) Radioactive Waste Directorate, and opposed by Andris Bankovskis, Director at 4D Energy Limited.

In order to ensure a “professional” debate it was originally arranged to be chaired by an external debating society but on the night they were unable to attend so Daniel Kenning, current EESG chair, stood in at the last minute.  However, this did not detract from a very professional event – well done Daniel.

The debate began with an audience show of hands for and against the motion.  Both speakers then presented an initial statement lasting about 10 - 15 minutes.  Each was then given time to respond to the other’s assertions.  Finally a further audience show of hands was taken.

During their presentations both speakers included technical and political data to support their positions related specifically to the precise form of words in the motion. Interestingly, the opposition speaker took pains to point out that he was not anti-nuclear per se but rather could not support the statement as written.

The outcome of the debate in terms of the show of hands by the audience was a shift of about 14% away from “for the motion” and “abstain” to “against the motion”. Well done Bruce and Andris for presenting very well thought-out and professional arguments.

John Earp

  • 0

Waste cannot be simply thrown away anymore, now it must be managed. Are you aware that you are throwing away many materials that could be saved? If we did simple things like reusing glass, we could reduce our municipal landfill sites by almost 10 percent. Although managing our trash seems to be the "in thing"to do, it is hardly convenient . Let's face the facts, sealed toxins "won't affect us for a good twenty years". Although this may be true, there are still many advantages to waste management. Today, more people are in favour of companies who invest in "green products". As a result, companies have removed phosphates , bleaches, and have made their paper products out of recycled papers.

Many people think they have done everything possible, such as recycling in their homes, schools or work place but deep down, however, we must all realize there's more to recycling than simply setting out your recyclables at the curb. In order to make recycling economically feasible, we must buy recycled products and packaging. When we buy recycled products we create an economic incentive for recyclable materials to be collected, manufactured, and marketed as new products. Buying recycled has both economic and environmental benefits. Purchasing products made from or packaged in recycled materials saves resources for future generations.

Although recycling can divert large portions of municipal solid waste from disposal, some waste must be placed in landfills. Modern landfills are well engineered facilities that are located, designed, operated, monitored, closed, cared for after closure, cleaned up when necessary, and financed to insure compliance with federal regulations. The Federal regulations were established to protect human health and the environment. In addition, these new landfills can collect potentially harmful landfill gas emissions and convert the gas into energy.

  • 0
What are you looking for?