14.12.2012 Views

International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

International Review of Waste Management Policy - Department of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

epresentations in relation to this consultation paper were invited up to 28th <strong>of</strong> July<br />

2008. The European Union completed and published an Implementation Plan in<br />

2007. 1096<br />

58.1 Recommendations<br />

Evidently, there is a need to progress the National Implementation Plan with some<br />

urgency. This plan will, presumably, have to consider the best approach to the<br />

Conventions in the light <strong>of</strong> their requirements.<br />

It is useful to define the main sources that give rise to POPs in the environment in<br />

order to consider where measures can be taken to reduce their generation or<br />

emission to the environment:<br />

865<br />

A) Pesticides (e.g. DDT);<br />

B) Industrial chemicals (e.g. polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs));<br />

C) Unintentional by-products (e.g. dioxins, furans).<br />

In relation to POPs arising from Source A), although regulation on the production and<br />

use <strong>of</strong> pesticides is clearly a valuable measure (and the EPA is naturally the<br />

appropriate responsible authority to administer this), this may be considered outside<br />

the scope <strong>of</strong> this review <strong>of</strong> waste policy.<br />

The requirements <strong>of</strong> the UNECE / Stockholm Conventions imply, in relation to Source<br />

B), regulation on the use <strong>of</strong> industrial chemicals which utilise or have potential to give<br />

rise to POPs. In this regard, many <strong>of</strong> the policy measures explored in other sections <strong>of</strong><br />

this annex have significant relevance. The obligation for producer responsibility,<br />

minimum recycling standards, and levies and bans on specific substances are<br />

measures which can reduce or eliminate the risk <strong>of</strong> environmental accumulation <strong>of</strong><br />

POPs.<br />

In relation to Source C), there is clear benefit to be derived from minimising the<br />

generation and dispersion <strong>of</strong> POPs as unintended by-products <strong>of</strong> waste treatment<br />

processes. Two potentially complimentary policy developments present themselves<br />

here:<br />

1. To ensure that any technologies used for the treatment <strong>of</strong> waste which may<br />

give rise to POPs operate to high environmental standards; and<br />

2. In the light <strong>of</strong> the possible alternatives available, to seek to reduce the<br />

quantity <strong>of</strong> material that passes to technologies that might give rise to<br />

additional emissions <strong>of</strong> POPs in order to reduce their generation and<br />

dispersal.<br />

In relation to the first point, some more detailed policy assessment has been carried<br />

out for the DoEHLG. The proposed Section 60 policy direction seeks to achieve a<br />

1096 Commision <strong>of</strong> the European Communities (2007) Community Implementation Plan for the<br />

Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants Commision Staff Working Document<br />

SEC(2007) 341, 9.3.2007.<br />

<strong>International</strong> <strong>Review</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Waste</strong> <strong>Policy</strong>: Annexes

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!