Sri Lanka must be wary of importing foreign trash
by J. A. A. S. Ranasinghe-January 26, 2020, 8:06 pmProductivity Specialist/Management Consultant
In a hard-hitting editorial, The Island, on 22nd Jan, following a decision taken by the Malaysian government to send back 150 containers of plastic waste to 13 countries, including Sri Lanka, condemned the dumping of the garbage in the developing countries, since China banned the import of plastic waste in 2018.
Of the 150 containers, 43 to France, 42 to the UK, 17 to the USA, 11 to Canada, 10 to Spain and the rest to Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore, Portugal, China, Bangladesh. Sri Lanka and Lithuania. Malaysia environment ministry says talks were ongoing with the US to send back another 60 containers this year whilst adding that Canada has 15 more containers, Japan 14, the UK 9 and Belgium 3,000 tons of non-recyclable plastic waste to countries, including the UK, the US and Canada.
It is crystal clear that the developed countries have selected South Asian counties as a dumping yard, as they could no longer tackle the plastic trash they generate on a commercial scale. Ultimately, the ban pushed trash manufacturing countries to tackle wasteful, disposable lifestyles at source, by forcing plastics and other disposable goods manufacturers to take responsibility for the environmental damage caused by their products throughout their whole life cycle. For plastic bottles, for example, the life cycle from production to decomposition would take approximately 450 years. This itself demonstrates the magnitude of the threat we are faced with.
There are fears that the ban will simply lead to these huge quantities of waste being exported to less developed, less well-regulated waste industries, especially in Southeast Asia. In fact, the UK exports of waste to Vietnam and Malaysia doubled in 2017, compared to 2016. However, there are no new waste markets with equivalent capacity to China’s over the last three decades.
The waste included cables from the UK, CDs from Bangladesh, contaminated milk cartons from Australia and electronic and household waste from North America, Japan, Saudi Arabia and China. Sri Lanka Customs recently detected the illegal importation of clinical waste from the UK. It is obvious that the dumping of contaminated waste of the developed countries, in the southeast region is a well-organized international business cartel for illegal processing or reshipment to other counties.
Environmentalist, Hemantha Withanage, is of the opinion that it is highly unlikely that Sri Lanka was the actual country of origin of the containers of plastic waste which were to be returned by Malaysia, and those shipments in question could have been re-exported as a trans-shipment. Sri Lanka has gained notoriety for importing substandard items and waste during the last decade and it has become an international hub for re-exporting. The import of inferior quality of pepper from Vietnam, for re-export, was the bane for plummeting of low bottom prices in the local market.
President Gotabaya Rajapaksa, in his "Vistas of Prosperity and Splendor", has pledged a sustainable environment policy in order to create a clutter free environment in that he has specifically mentioned that ocean resources will be utilized in a sustainable manner, under the concept of a blue economy. We are confident that the new Minister in charge of Environment would act swiftly in prohibiting the import of foreign trash, as his counterpart in Malaysia had acted and evidently demonstrated that Sri Lanka is not a dumping yard for foreign garbage. What is required is an action plan to tackle the problem of illegal plastic importation and other rubbish, such as clinical waste, diapers and discarded electronic gadgets.
The Environment Minister, Yeo Bee Yin, is reported to have said her government will launch an action plan on illegal plastic importation next month that will help the different agencies coordinate enforcement and speed up the process of returning the waste. The Minister added: "Our position is very firm. We just want to send back the waste and give a message that Malaysia is not the dumping site of the world."
Exporting Waste
What is the business with rich countries shoving all their rubbish to developing countries? It is true that certain countries do export their garbage rather than dump it in their own soil. They ship it to other countries so that it becomes a headache for the other country. Western countries have been exporting their garbage since the 1970s. It's hard to gauge the environmental toll overall, but it is an open secret we know about shockers such as when a Dutch-registered tanker, the Probo Koala, deposited hundreds of tons of toxic sludge at 17 sites in the Ivory Coast, in August 2006, causing widespread illness and at least 10 deaths.
When rich nations export their trash, they believe that developing nations get a new source of cheap raw materials — but at great cost to their own health and to the environment. As Chinese journalist Tang Hou puts it: "China is the world's second largest consumer of plastic; one ton of synthetic resin costs 11,000 yuan (around US$1,420), but a ton of imported plastic can be bought for as little as 4,000 yuan (around US$515). The work of sorting the waste is hard and dirty, but for many it is a more lucrative business than the alternative."
United Nations Interventions
The Basel Convention of the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and their Disposal was negotiated, under the United Nations Environment Programme, in 1988, severely limiting the international transportation of hazardous waste. The United States has signed it but not ratified the Basel Convention and groups, as the Seattle-based action network, are especially incensed about how much American "e-waste"- discarded computers and other electronic equipment – is exported to China, India and Pakistan, where its components (such as phosphor dust and lead contaminate water, soil and air. Hapless workers of the importing countries put their health and water supplies in danger by breaking apart and burning wires and circuit boards, then washing them in rivers and other public waterways to extract valuable substances.
Banning of Import of Waste by Developing Countries
It is heartening to note that several countries have taken bold decisions not to entertain garbage from foreign countries. Countries such as the Philippines, Malaysia and Rwanda in no uncertain terms have openly rejected the import of garbage. This is a wake-up call to Sri Lanka.
The Philippines
Philippine President has ordered a total ban of waste materials from any foreign countries, with instructions not to accept any garbage shipment in the future. He has ordered to ship back 69 containers of garbage sent to the Philippines, in batches, from 2013 to 2014. It is reported that Canada had exported 103 shipping containers to the Philippines, out of which 34 had been disposed of. According to the Philippines Bureau of Customs, the remaining 69 containers mostly consisted of household garbage and electronic waste, including used adult diapers and kitchen scraps. However, the garbage was wrongly described as recyclable plastic scraps.
China
Since the 1980s, China has become the world’s largest importer of waste, or "foreign trash". By 2012, up to 56 per cent of global exported plastic waste ended up in China. China has banned 24 types of foreign trash, leaving the western governments of waste exporters little options to face up to the reality of their waste problems. This move, no doubt, has had a devastating impact on the recycling industry. Though the regulation is primarily designed to address major environmental and health issues in China, it will send ripples in the recycling industry globally. It has the potential to propel many waste-exporting countries – who, for far too long, have taken an "out of sight, out of mind" attitude to waste disposal – to adopt far more progressive disposal and recycling systems.
Foreign trash was a source of material for China’s booming manufacturing sector, but it was a double-edged sword. Given the lack of effective oversight and monitoring, it has caused enormous environmental and health problems. Guiyu, once the China’s e waste capital in Guangdong province, a hub for the recycling of imported electronics waste came into the spotlight in 2003 when an investigation uncovered that up to 80 per cent of children in the town had excess levels of lead in their bloodstream. The award-winning documentary, Plastic China, released last year, showed in painful picture of the serious health hazards and environmental consequences of the foreign waste trade have had on the lives of the people.
Though it is not a total ban itself, it will ban the import of 24 of the dirtiest and most polluting types of waste, ranging from household plastic waste to unsorted paper and recycled textiles to slag. The ban is also a wake-up call to western countries heavily addicted to plastics. Take the UK for instance: from 2012 to 2016, an average 65 per cent of the country’s exported plastic waste was shipped to China making an average of half a million tons every year.
Thailand
The Thai government is clamping down on single-use bags, but vendors are having trouble finding alternatives. The Country generates more than 5,000 tons of plastic trash a day, three-quarters of which ends up in landfills.
Mitigation Measurers
Since the export market for waste garbage will have a severe restriction across the world, the entire sector will become hungrier for domestic supplies in the years to come. The onus will now be on governments across the globe to introduce more comprehensive and effective waste classification measures, to ensure the more gets recycled, and less gets dumped in rapidly expanding landfill sites. The dumping of waste thrash in Sri Lanka will sure to raise a hornet’s nest from the environmentalists in time to come. The Island carried a series of articles in the last three weeks totally condemning the polythene and plastic trash and it will no doubt have a cascading effect on our environment including waterways.
MARPOL Convention
The above maritime convention stipulates certain restrictions when trash is transported in shipments but in the light of the catastrophic situation, more rigid restrictions will have to be introduced. In order to prevent pollution from garbage, the International Maritime Organization (IMO), it has taken a combination of complementary techniques to manage garbage, such as the following: reduction at source; reusing or recycling; onboard processing (treatment); discharge into the sea in those limited situations where it is permitted; and discharge to a port reception facility. The IMO has advised the shipping companies to remove, reduce, all packaging, at an early stage, to limit the generation of garbage on board ships.
Substitutes
Health and environmental issues are one and the same of the same coin and hence they are inter-twined. Bad environment is bad for health. On this premise, new inventions have to be found to meet this objective. It would not be a difficult task for the scientists to invent substitutes of plastic and polyethene bags, cups, bottles making use of local ingredients. Plates, straws, cups, food boxes made out of sugarcane waste, banana leaf and fallen leaves in palm estates are popular products in certain countries. Let our Universities and Research Organizations make an effort and come out with new inventions for which government should spend lavishly for this worthy cause.
The world cannot continue with the current wasteful consumption model based on infinite growth in a finite world. The new era is not just about effective recycling, it is also about tackling our waste problem at source, by drastically reducing the production of billions of plastic goods every year.
Industries and corporations that manufacture and market huge amounts of disposable plastics need to take responsibility for their products through their entire life-cycle, take responsibility for the environmental costs, and invest in transformative solutions and alternatives that will stop the current flood of waste into our lives.
