=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL’S HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #49
—November 2, 1987—
News and resources for environmental justice.
——
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@igc.apc.org
==========
The Back issues and Index are available
here.
The official RACHEL archive is here. It’s
updated constantly.
To subscribe, send E-mail to rachel-weekly-
request@world.std.com
with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message. It’s free.
===Previous issue==========================================Next issue===
REPORT DESCRIBES WIDE RANGE OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR DISPOSING OF HAZARDOUS
CHEMICAL WASTES
Pollution fights often follow predictable steps:
1) A polluter sets up shop, establishes a going concern, creates jobs, and starts making money. Years pass.
2) The community begins to suspect that something is wrong. A cluster of leukemias appear, or the water
begins to smell bad, or a group of children faint in school. Local people begin to wonder what’s happening
to them.
3) The regulatory agencies (local health department, state environmental department and U.S. EPA) deny
that any problem exists. They refuse to monitor. In the newspapers, they say local people are “misinformed,”
or “misguided” or troublemakers.
4) The “troublemakers” gain sophistication. They read; they talk late into the night; they make a million
phone calls. They gather evidence that the agencies should be gathering. They learn to use the media. They
contact experts and they begin to develop expertise themselves. They begin to realize that they are capable
and powerful.
5) Local people push the issue and public hearings are held. At the public hearings, industry (or, more often,
their spokespeople in government) try to turn the tables and put the burden of proof on the victims, asking
local people “What alternatives can you suggest?”
Now of course it is not up to the citizenry to re-design America’s industrial apparatus. Nevertheless, in such
a situation, citizens can often move things forward by suggesting alternatives for industry (and their
spokespeople in government) to consider.
Until recently, there was no single source for information on alternative technologies for chemical disposal.
Now the Citizen’s Clearinghouse for Hazardous Waste (CCHW) in Arlington, VA, has published
ADVANCED TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES FOR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTES, 82 pages of
information about existing technologies that can destroy (or, in some cases, prevent) chemical wastes.
This report (first issued in August, 1986, but revised in September, 1987) is mostly aimed at people working
on Superfund sites. The government’s response at most Superfund dumps has been to put a clay cap over
the site and perhaps a “grout curtain” or “slurry wall” underground at the site. These are called
“containment” methods. Caps and walls will slow the migration of chemicals from a dump, but they are a
superficial, temporary non-solution to a serious, long-term problem. Contain-ment methods have only one
real advantage: they slow the advance of the problem until another generation of politicians has taken
office, thus getting today’s officials off the hook.
Anyone looking for real solutions at Superfund sites will want to read this new CCHW report. It describes
55 different technologies that might be applied to a cleanup situation, depending on the nature of the local
problem. But perhaps more importantly, it contains a list of questions you should ask yourself about any
new technology (pg. 4), a sensible discussion of ways citizens can promote consideration of new
technologies (pgs. 37-52) and a description of EPA’s program for evaluating new technologies, called the
SITE [Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation] program (pgs. 40-45). SITE is formally evaluating 10
new technologies for cleanup.
CCHW has held two roundtables on advanced technologies. Without endorsing anyone’s products, they
bring in citizen leaders to hear presentations by companies selling adanced technologies. The citizens come
away from the meetings impressed by the broad range of technologies available today for waste cleanup,
and of course the companies benefit because citizens start advocating consideration of new technologies at
sites around the country. The companies pay for the privilege of presenting their wares to assembled
citizens, so this kind of roundtable could be a money maker for your group.
ADVANCED TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES FOR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTES is $8.95 from
CCHW, P.O. Box 926, Arlington, VA 22216. Phone (703) 276-7070. The EPA’s SITE program is described in a
December, 1986, booklet called SUPERFUND INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION (SITE)
STRATEGY AND PROGRAM PLAN [EPA/540/G-86/001; OSWER 9380.2-3] published by the Office of
Research and Development, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, U.S. EPA, 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460; phone the Superfund hotline to request your copy: (800) 424-9346.
–Peter Montague, Ph.D.
Descriptor terms: citizen groups; alternative treatment technologies; site; superfund; remedial action; waste
treatment technologies; waste disposal technologies;