Treatment and Disposal of Hazardous Waste

Chapter 5
Treatment and Disposal of

Hazardous Waste
The Study on Mater Plan for Hazardous Waste Management in Romania Final Report
Japan International Cooperation Agency Volume 1 Main Report: Strategy and Action Plan
5. Treatment and Disposal of Hazardous Waste
5.1 Current Conditions

Hazardous waste management is variable in Romania, management of organic wastes
from the oil sector and organic chemicals sector has in the past been fairly good, and in some
cases still is. However several in-house facilities for treatment and/or disposal of organic
wastes have been allowed to fall into disrepair and have become unusable due to economic
difficulties. The situation regarding inorganic wastes is worse, in that a significant proportion
of in-house treatment systems have been allowed to fall into disrepair and have become
derelict.
In addition enterprises in Romania; are often failing to identify some hazardous wastes
(either deliberately, because of unwillingness to pay for proper management or lack of
available options for proper management, or unwittingly), secondly, some non-hazardous
wastes are being incorrectly categorised as hazardous wastes.
Some hazardous wastes are however being identified and segregated and many of these
are being “stored” pending later management. The term “storage” implies a future intention to
do something with the material stored, but in Romania the term storage is used interchangeably
with the term “disposal”. Most “stores” are in reality waste dumps.
5.2 Issues
Not all hazardous waste generation can be avoided, similarly it is not practicable to
reuse, recover, recycle or utilise all unavoidable hazardous wastes. There will always be a need
for environmentally sound hazardous waste treatment and disposal.
Wastes, wastewaters, emissions and hazardous wastes are all inter-related. Treatment
of hazardous wastes is principally aimed at reducing the hazardous nature of the waste in order
to facilitate simpler final disposal. For example, toxic heavy metals may be precipitated as
water insoluble hydroxides, the resultant sludge being dewatered and stabilised to give a
non-toxic, non-hazardous, solid material for landfill and an effluent for wastewater treatment.
Equally, wastewater treatment generally results in a hazardous sludge for treatment and
disposal. Figure 5.2.1 is a general schematic illustrating industrial waste management activities
and their inter-relationships.
As indicated above, where facilities exist they are often poorly maintained and many
have fallen into disuse. It is important to ensure that adequate facilities are developed to
manage hazardous wastes currently being generated and likely to be generated in the future.
This will require a combination of upgrading existing facilities and development of new
facilities. Various national approaches to achieve this objective are discussed in the next
section.
Whatever method is used to secure the development of necessary infrastructure, it is
important that coherent plans should be produced, and that these are properly integrated with
other inter-related plans such as the plans for municipal and solid waste management.
A key issue in Romania is the policy of EU Accession and the current programme of
approximation of Romanian legislation. The majority of current hazardous waste management
practices and waste management facilities do not comply with current EU standards.
5-1
In developing this strategy and plan certain key policies and principles have been
considered, these are listed in Table 5.2.1.
Table 5.2.1 Key Principles and Policies in Romania
EU Accession Romania is committed to EU Accession.
Waste Management Hierarchy Hierarchy of waste management options.
Polluter Pays Principle The principle that the polluter should pay for proper
management of wastes generation and cost of any abatement
measures.
Proximity Principle Where practicable, wastes should be managed at or close to
the place of waste generation. A hierarchy can be expressed
as illustrated in Figure 5.2.1.
Duty of Care Generator responsible for the proper management of wastes
generated.
Precautionary Principle Avoiding practices which are not known to be
environmentally sound.
BATNEEC Use of “Best Available Technology Not Entailing Excessive
Cost.”
Source: JICA study team
None of the principles can be considered in isolation, for example treatment of all
wastes at source is impracticable, and many enterprises do not for example generate sufficient
hazardous organic wastes to justify constructing a dedicated incinerator. Similarly there may be
insufficient such wastes to justify constructing an incinerator to serve just one city or county.
Similarly, the waste management hierarchy generally takes precedence over the proximity
hierarchy (e.g. it is better to recycle waste at a national facility than dispose of it locally).
Figure 5.2.1 – Proximity Hierarchy
Source: David Newby Associates
5-2
Japan International Cooperation Agency
The Study on Mater Plan for Hazardous Waste Management in Romania
Figure 5.2.2 Schematic of Industrial Waste Management
WASTE MANAGEMENT SCHEME
Waste generation Analysis / Storage Primary Treatment Secondary Treatment Disposal

Wastewater
No
Minimise No Meets Yes Wastewater Meets Yes

Avoid
Reuse /
WWTP Treatment Discharge Discharge to Sewer
Recycle?
Consent? Plant Consent?
Yes No
Liquid Waste
Yes
Yes
(Inorganic)
Storage
Minimise
No Meets Physical / Effluent Meets

Avoid
Reuse / Pending
WWTP Chemical WWTP
Recycle? Analysis / No
Limits? Treatment Limits?
Treatment
Yes
No
Yes
Liquid Waste
Meets
Meets
(Organic)
WWTP
5-3
On-site
Storage WWTP Effluent Yes
Minimise
No Treatment Limits?
No
Avoid
Reuse / Pending Limits?

Recycle? Analysis / No
Treatment No
Yes
Volume 1 Main Report: Strategy and Action Plan

Inorganic
Mainly
Inorganic or
Solid Waste
Residues Organic?
(Inorganic)
Organic
Storage
Minimise
No Meets Yes
Avoid
Reuse / Pending
Landfill Landfill
Recycle? Analysis /
Consent?
Treatment
Yes Effluent
Yes
No
On-site / Residues Meets
Off-site Landfill
Treatment Consent?
Solid Waste
No
(Organic)
No
Storage
Minimise
No Meets Yes
Avoid
Reuse / Pending
Landfill Incineration
Recycle? Analysis /
Consent?
Treatment
Yes No
Final Report
Reuse Recyclables Collection / Storage Recycling

5.3 Identification and Assessment of Existing Facilities
5.3.1 Interim Storage of Hazardous Waste

Wastes may be stored at the point of generation, pending transfer to longer term storage,
landfill or for further management (reuse, recovery, recycling, treatment or disposal). This
“interim” storage is often under very poor conditions with very poor containment of wastes.
5.3.2 Waste Treatment and Disposal at Source

In common with many countries with transitional economies, many of Romania’s
industries have old, out-dated, inefficient processes and equipment. This is particularly true of
waste treatment and disposal systems where these exist.
Many factories have in the past have had physical/chemical treatment systems and
incineration systems which, due to economic pressures, have been allowed to fall into disrepair
and have become inoperative as a result. Similarly, due to the general decline some factories
have opted not to use their existing treatment facilities and also discharge wastes untreated or
are stockpiling the wastes. Whilst this is a fairly general problem there are some examples of
good practice too.
It is not uncommon for enterprises to compensate for lack of adequate wastewater
treatment to rely on massive dilution of hazardous wastes to meet discharge consent
concentrations.
Several enterprises have dedicated hazardous waste incinerators; these are listed in
Table 5.3.1 these are generally used for management of the respective enterprise’s own wastes
although some do accept wastes from third parties.
5.3.3 Waste “Storage”

ICIM have estimated that approximately 500,000 tons of hazardous industrial wastes
were accumulated and stored within various companies by the end of 2000. In theory this is
temporary storage pending utilisation, recovery, recycling, treatment or final disposal/landfill.
However, it is noted that such “temporary” storage clearly lasts more than two years in some
cases, essentially changing the local storage area into an unprotected landfill, located on
companies’ sites.
The most commonly used storage methods are: bulk storage, storage in metallic
containers and storage in basins/settling tanks. Storage conditions are often very poor and
containment often poor - some metal containers observed holding wastes have almost
completely rusted away.
5.3.4 Waste Collection and Transportation

Waste collection agents appear to be generally private companies and are essentially
local enterprises rather than national organisations. Most of the existing collectors in Romania
are municipal waste collection and transportation contractors and these largely only collect
municipal wastes. Some of these collectors also collect refuse-type wastes from commercial
and industrial sources, park wastes and construction and demolition wastes. These contractors
claim not to collect any hazardous wastes.
5-4
There are waste recycling organisations that collect wastes from generators, some of
these collect hazardous wastes, most notably waste oils, car batteries and, to a lesser extent,
solvents.
There are a very small number of hazardous waste management contractors in Romania.
Those that do exist generally offer waste collection but their transportation capacity is
generally small. No dedicated haulage contractors have been identified who collect hazardous
wastes.
The remainder of hazardous waste transported is transported by the waste generators
themselves. However, more than 80% of hazardous waste is deposited or stored and this
generally happens at or close to the place of waste generation requiring minimal transportation.
5.3.5 Waste Treatment and Disposal Off-site

A country in transition like Romania generally does not have many hazardous waste
contractors (companies which collect, transport, treat and/or dispose of hazardous wastes),
however, there are a small number of hazardous waste management contractors. Note that
hazardous waste recycling contractors have been covered separately (see Chapter 3).
There are a large number of waste collectors in Romania but these are only collecting
municipal wastes. Some industrial wastes find their way into this collection stream but this is
unofficial and claimed to be small volume.
These collection contractors generally do not operate the landfill sites; these are
generally developed and operated by municipalities although private sector landfill operations
are becoming more common. Industries largely transport their own wastes to municipal
landfills or operate their own landfills / dumps – these activities are being covered by the waste
generation sources survey activities (see Volume 3 Chapter 1). The situation is further
discussed in the following sub-Chapters:
5-5
Table 5.3.1 Incinerators on Industrial Enterprises Own Sites in Romania
Capacity Likely to meet
Type of Gas Cleaning Wastes Capacity T/yr Operating
Organisation (Currently EU Standards
Incinerator System Processed (Total) (Yes/No)
Used) (Yes/No)
Arpechim, 3 Incinerators for Acrylonotiriles 80 cu.m / hr Unknown
Pitesti 1 process (process
emissions emissions)
1 liquids Electroplating unknown unknown Yes Unknown
incinerator wastes!
Oltchim, Fixed hearth Acid gas 18,000 18,000 Possible
Rm. Valcea liquid waste absorber (for
incinerator 2 recovery of HCl)
Petrobrazi 3 Fixed hearth 5,000 ? No 3 No
liquid
incinerators
1 Rotary Kiln 16,500 No No
5-6
Petrom, Fixed hearth, Caustic soda Oil wastes. No (awaiting No

Bucharest dual combustion scrubber. authorisation)
chamber.

Uzina Produse 1 unknown type unknown Explosives (own unknown 65 tonnes (2001) Yes Unknown
Speciale – and 3rd party)
Fagaras 1
S.C. Kober SRL Unknown type unknown Paints/varnishes unknown unknown Yes Unknown
1 Process third party wastes as well as their own wastes
2 Oltchim want to add solids handling capability.
3 PetroBrazi claim that at least one is operating but this is considered unlikely to be the case.
Source: MoWEP/JICA Study Team
Final Report
1) Principally Organic Industrial Wastes

Principally organic wastes can be suitable candidates for recovery / recycling, this is
discussed in Chapter 3. With respect to the treatment and disposal of these wastes, the preferred
technology is thermal treatment (incineration or utilisation in cement kilns).
There are several hazardous waste incinerators currently operating in Romania, some
of these are operated as independent entities and some are operated by waste generators for
their own wastes but which are potential resources for management of other generators wastes.
Most of these organisations operate incinerators and a small number operate physical/chemical
treatment processes. The identified incinerators, operated by waste generating companies,
were listed in Table 5.3.1, Table 5.3.2 lists incinerators which are operated solely as a
commercial service.
In addition two cement manufacturers, Lafarge Romcim and HolCim have rotary
cement kilns in which they hope to process hazardous waste as a supplementary fuel. At
present, neither of these accept significant volumes of hazardous waste due to certain barriers
including lack of willingness to pay.
Sotem Romania SRL is a company formed recently by Civa (USA) and HolCim which
has an organic waste blending facility at the HolCim Campulung cement plant (see Figure
5.3.1). Sotem has put considerable efforts into developing the market for cement kiln
incineration and has met with limited success. Sotem’s facility at Campulung has the capability
of processing a wide variety of organic wastes including liquids, sludges and solids and
supplies blended waste as a fuel to the HolCim cement kiln. Figure 5.3.2 shows the blended
waste feed system at the cement kiln.
The cement kiln operations do not currently fully meet European standards with respect
to level of automation and continuous monitoring but Sotem/HolCim have a programme of
improvements underway which will result in a system that will largely comply with EU
standards.
Figure 5.3.1 – Sotem Organic Waste Blending Facility
Source: JICA Study Team
5-7
Figure 5.3.2 – Blended Waste Feed System at Cement Kiln
Source: JICA Study Team
The two merchant incinerators for hazardous waste shown in Table 5.3.2 currently
known to operate in Romania do not meet current EU standards. Both of these are very small
scale units and disposal charges are high (largely due to the lack of economies of scale). One or
both of these could potentially be upgraded to meet such standards. Because the units are small
scale they are likely to serve small local waste generators and are unlikely to be of great
strategic significance.
2) Principally Inorganic Wastes

Other than recovery/recycling, the preferred methodology for management of
principally inorganic waste is physical/chemical treatment to reduce the level of hazard of the
waste followed by ecologically sound landfill.
Waste treatment in Romania is well behind Western practices. Table 5.3.3 derived from
the ICIM 2002 Survey (for which the information is provided by the local EPIs) identifies the
percentages of hazardous waste managed by different recovery and treatment and disposal
methods. Many facilities are extremely basic with no means of mixing contents to ensure
adequate treatment, no fixed pipework systems or storage tanks for reagents, no means of
taking adequate samples and so on.
Some enterprises have no access to sewer discharge systems and rely on tanker
collection of wastewaters for disposal to sewage treatment works.
5-8
Table 5.3.2 Merchant Incinerators Currently Existing in Romania
Organisation Type of Gas Cleaning Wastes Capacity T/yr Capacity Operating Likely to meet
Incinerator System Processed (Total) (Currently (Yes/No) EU Standards
Used) (Yes/No)
Mondeco, Fixed hearth (2 Gravity settling Clinical wastes 40 kg/hr 40 kg/hr Yes No
Suceava units) of heavy 10 kg/hr (2nd unit
particulate only inoperative)
Pro-Air Clean, Fixed hearth, Activated Clinical and 1,200 1,200 1 Yes Possible
Timisoara dual combustion carbon, alkali other hazardous
chamber. scrubber / filter wastes
1) In 2001 only operated 39 days but since February 2002 operating full time.
Source: MoWEP/JICA Study Team

5-9

Final Report
Table 5.3.3 Hazardous Waste Treatment Methods in 2002
RECYCLING OPERATIONS for hazardous waste (2002) Code %

recovery and regeneration of solvents R1 0.025
recycling and recovery of organic waste R2 0.033
recycling and recovery of metallic waste R3 3.3
recycling and recovery of other inorganic waste R4 1.149
regeneration of acids and bases R5 0.463
recycling of materials used for pollutants collection R6 0.227
recycling of catalysts R7 0.002
refining of used oils R8 0.584
use as combustible material or other mean for energy production R9 0.941
use in agriculture, composting, other biological operations R10 0.02
other non-mentioned use of waste R11 0.438
waste exchange between operators R12 3.113
temporary storage R13 1.355
non-specified 0.12
TOTAL 11.77
DISPOSAL OPERATIONS for hazardous waste (2002) Code %

disposal on soil and in subsoil E1 5.246
waste treatment in contact with soil E2 0.013
underground injection E3 0
discharge on surfaces E4 71.945
disposal on special landfills E5 3.186
discharge in waters E6 0.492
discharge in sea E7 0
biological treatment E8 0.408
physico-chemical treatment E9 2.28
incineration on soil E10 0.003
incineration on sea E11 0
permanent storage E12 3.706
mixing E13 0.004
reconditioning E14 0.001
temporary storage E15 0.868
non-specified 0.079
TOTAL 88.23
Source: ICIM 2002 Survey
It should be noted that in Romania, the terms ‘storage’, ‘landfill’ and ‘land disposal’ are
often used interchangeably, as there has been tendency to label many wastes as materials being
stored for future reuse, whether or not this is ever likely to be feasible.
According to data held by ICIM, in 1999 there were 846 industrial waste landfill sites
in Romania; ICIM 2002 data indicates there are currently 687 industrial waste landfills.
Landfill accounts for >80% of final disposal for industrial waste. It should be noted that in
certain landfills for urban waste industrial waste is also disposed; some belonging to the
category of hazardous waste, a fact that represents a serious infringement of the norms
regarding the management of such waste. Many of the ‘landfills’ for industrial waste deposits
are basic with little or no special provisions for containment of waste, leachate control or final
cover; also, there are a large number of landfills for mining spoils (203) and settling ponds /
5 - 10
catch pits (189) (Table 5.3.4). Table 5.3.5 shows landfills by EU hazard category.
Table 5.3.4 Industrial Landfills by Categories

Mining Landfills for
Catch pits Drying Simple Underground
Waste slag and Other
and ponds beds deposits deposits
Landfills ashes
Number 203 189 55 77 107 45 11
Occupied 5409 1608 50 3102 129 2 47
surface (ha)
Source: ICIM 2002 Survey Data
Table 5.3.5 Landfills by Hazard Categories

Inert Non-hazardous Hazardous Not Specified
Number 103 351 147 86
Occupied surface (ha) 4500 4428 749 669
Source: ICIM 2002 Survey Data
Only 30% of the landfills for industrial waste have authorisation to operate. The
remainder operate without such authorisation. 34% of landfills for industrial waste are located
within built-up areas, 60% are outside settlements and 6% are located near waters.
Although the vast majority of industrial waste landfills are unsuitable for hazardous
wastes, many probably receive a certain amount of hazardous wastes due to poor segregation of
waste at source.
The majority of industrial waste landfills (about 76%) occupy relatively small areas (up
to 5 ha). At least 50 industrial waste landfills do not have any investment for environmental
protection. Some landfills have one or more special features (eg lining, drainage for leachate,
perimeter ditches, monitoring boreholes), but very few have all the necessary features to
comply with the conditions for the environmental protection. None meet full EU engineering
or operational standards. In addition, fly tipping is common.
According to UNECE Environmental Report For Romania 2001, there are 83 land
disposal sites specifically for hazardous wastes, with a total area of about 450 ha, located in 30
counties. 75% of these sites accept more than 10 tons of hazardous waste per day.
Only 10% of the landfills for hazardous waste are authorised by the environmental
protection authorities. Most hazardous waste is deposited in landfill sites (60%), or stored
(20%) at the industrial facility where the waste was generated, although some larger waste
storage areas have been established on the sites of obsolete production plant where the ground
was already contaminated.
5.4 Objectives and Targets

The general objectives with respect to the treatment and disposal of hazardous wastes
are defined within Romania’s laws specifying that:
• Wastes are managed in such a way as to avoid damage to the environment and
human health (do not present risks for the human health, water, air, soil, fauna and
vegetation),
5 - 11
• Wastes are managed in such a way as to avoid nuisance (do not produce noise
pollution or unpleasant smells and do no affect the landscape and protected areas),
• The Polluter Pays Principle should be adopted.
• Wastes should be avoided and minimised as far as practicable
• Preference should be given to environmentally sound recycling and recovery of
wastes that cannot be avoided,
• The principle of the producer’s responsibility should be adopted,
• The principle of using the best available techniques, not entailing excessive costs
(BATNEEC) is specified,
• The proximity principle should be adopted, stating that waste shall be capitalized
and disposed of as near as possible to the point of its generation,
• With respect to export, the principles of non-discrimination, consent and
agreement for hazardous waste transport only in countries having adequate
disposal technologies; must be observed in international commerce with waste.
In addition, in line with Romania’s policy of EU Accession, the objectives are to

progressively move towards compliance with EU standards in accordance with Romania’s
program for approximation.
5.5 Strategy
5.5.1 Basic Concept

Current economic industrial and regulatory circumstances in Romania suggest that the
strategy should draw strongly upon:
(i) The private entrepreneurial skills and resources that already exist within the local
economy, and
(ii) The government’s role in ensuring that legislation, regulations and control are
available, implemented and enforced within an appropriate timeframe.
(iii) Government encouraging investment in environmental improvements by
economic instruments, for example by facilitating access to economical
commercial loans. (see discussion in Chapter 7.3)
The initial focus should be upon mobilising these resources to provide low-cost,
scaleable facilities using relatively basic technologies to meet the known immediate demand as
early as possible at affordable prices. This approach would retain the flexibility to expand
existing facilities or to provide additional facilities at a later time when (i) the regulatory and
enforcement system has been fully implemented, (ii) when waste generators have a greater
awareness of the waste problem and its potential solutions, and (iii) when the magnitude of the
waste flows is better known and waste generators come under more systematic regulation.
5.5.2 Waste Generation and Interim Storage

With respect to waste generation and waste segregation the objectives are to move from
generally poor avoidance and minimisation of waste to good waste avoidance and
minimisation and from poor identification of, and lack of segregation of, hazardous wastes to
5 - 12
the situation where they are properly identified, properly segregated and therefore can be
managed effectively.
This should be achieved by a mixture of encouragement and awareness raising backed
up by improved compliance-orientated regulation and control. Appropriate guidance notes and
standards need to be developed, promulgated and enterprises encouraged/made to comply (see
discussion in Chapter 8).
A tool for promoting the proper identification of hazardous wastes at source should be
an improved hazardous waste reporting system backed up by relevant regulations and an
improved waste management information system (WMIS).
With respect to interim storage of wastes, hazardous wastes need to be stored under
improved conditions; again the mechanism for securing improvements has to be the
development and promulgation of appropriate standards, followed by the effective application
and enforcement of those standards.
With regard to the latter, there is overlap with the issue of control of hazardous
substances and their storage and handling. It makes most sense to integrate the control of
hazardous waste interim storage with the control of storage of hazardous substances.
STRATEGY
Implementation of awareness raising programmes.
Promotion of waste avoidance and minimisation projects via incentives.
Introduction of regulatory provisions to promote avoidance and minimisation

(e.g. statutory targets).
Identification of existing practices at enterprises and development of

compliance programmes for securing necessary improvements.
Remediation of inadequate facilities for intermediate storage and waste

management at source.
Closure of inadequate facilities which are not suitable for upgrading linked to
promotion of the use of environmentally acceptable third party solutions.
5 - 13
STRATEGY
Development of EU compatible standards for storage, treatment and disposal of

hazardous wastes.
Progressive implementation and enforcement of those standards.
Identification of external factors resulting in poor hazardous waste management

and development of improved integrated approach.
Development and implementation of an improved data collection system linked

to development of a national Waste Management Information System (WMIS).
Promotion of the development of Romanian capacity for undertaking avoidance

and minimisation projects.
Promotion of industry uptake of avoidance and minimisation projects by

awareness raising.
5.5.3 Waste Treatment and Disposal

The sound treatment and disposal of industrial waste and industrial hazardous waste is
an essential element of an effective overall waste management system. In general terms,
treatment at source is most appropriate for low-capital cost treatment processes or for
generators of very large volumes of waste whilst centralised facilities are most appropriate for
management of wastes requiring larger capital investments and wastes generated by smaller
enterprises.
It is generally accepted that centralised, strategic, facilities for environmentally sound
management of hazardous wastes are a necessary element of the overall hazardous waste
management system. The availability of suitable facilities is a critical element in that the
legislation cannot be complied with unless the facilities exist.
Physical/chemical treatment processes are generally low capital cost and indeed many
enterprises have physical/chemical treatment systems but often these are old, low-technology
processes and many have been allowed to fall into disrepair to the point at which they are
unusable.
Thermal treatment processes are high capital cost processes and generally most viable
provided as centralised/regionalised resources. However, because Romania has many large
chemical, petroleum and petrochemical industries there are a significant number of
incinerators within existing industries.
5 - 14
There are two very small commercially operated incinerators (ProAirClean and
Mondeco) and two enterprises take wastes from third parties to burn alongside their own
wastes generated (Arpechim and Uzina Produse Speciale – Fagaras). The small sizes of the
ProAirClean and Mondeco incinerators are such that they are unlikely to be of strategic
importance. The other two incinerators may have some spare capacity but again are unlikely to
have great strategic importance.
Once again, many of these are low-technology devices and some have been poorly
maintained resulting in some being unusable.
In addition, Romania has an established cement industry with several rotary cement
kilns suitable for modification for utilisation of hazardous wastes. Two of the cement
companies want to provide a service for the management of such wastes.
Refineries generating large volumes of organic wastes need to treat and or dispose of
these wastes and have a need for access to incineration plant. They could be potential investors
in incineration, indeed some refineries have developed incinerators but several have been
allowed to fall into disrepair and are unusable. Refurbishment / replacement could be
extremely expensive, and whilst refurbished / new incinerators on refineries could process
third party wastes, cement kiln incineration is likely to be more cost effective.
The situation then in Romania is slightly unusual in that facilities for the proper
management of inorganic wastes are more lacking than facilities for proper thermal treatment.
The strategy needs to take this into account.
1) Options for the Management of Predominantly Inorganic Wastes

The options for improving the management of the principally inorganic wastes are:
Requiring enterprises with existing treatment facilities to properly maintain these facilities and
use them,
• Requiring enterprises without the necessary facilities to develop them and
use them,
• Requiring enterprises to use commercial facilities where they exist,
• Promoting and securing the development of regional facilities for treatment
and disposal,
• Requiring enterprises to properly store wastes pending the development of
commercial facilities and to send the wastes to these facilities once
developed,
• Penalising enterprises failing to manage their wastes properly.
Whilst existing treatment technologies in industries may be low-technology, many

could be restored / upgraded and made to run in an environmentally sound manner. Indeed the
low level of automation can be an advantage in terms of dealing with lower level throughputs.
Many existing installations, however, may need complete replacement.
5 - 15
The “compliance program” type mechanism could be implemented with existing

enterprises to require the restoration or redevelopment of necessary on-site treatment capacity.
There is a certainly a viable role to be played by waste management companies in
offering physical/chemical waste treatment services. It should be noted that these may become
less economically viable in the medium to long term as some companies realise that they can
treat more cost-effectively at source. The higher the transportation costs the more cost effective
treatment at source becomes. In view of this, relatively small scale, regional, facilities for
physical/chemical treatment make the most sense.
Industrial waste landfill will always be a requirement, no matter how much effort is put
into 3Rs there will always be hazardous waste requiring treatment and disposal. There will be
two kinds of need for landfill; the first is the need for mono-disposal landfills for the large
volume generation of non-useful wastes by industrial enterprises. The second type is
multi-waste industrial waste landfill for the smaller generators of waste requiring landfill.
The EU Landfill Directive requires landfills to be categorised as either:
(1) Inert Waste Landfills (Landfills accepting inert wastes, e.g. most Construction
and Demolition Wastes)
(2) Non-hazardous Waste Landfills (Landfills accepting non-hazardous wastes)
(3) Hazardous Waste Landfills (Landfills accepting hazardous wastes).
Hazardous wastes should where practicable be treated to reduce the hazard of the waste
prior to disposal (requirement of Waste Management Hierarchy and of Article 6a of Landfill
Directive). It is practicable to treat most hazardous wastes to render them non-hazardous for
final disposal therefore most hazardous wastes requiring landfill capacity will actually be
suitable for non-hazardous waste landfill. There will be some hazardous wastes requiring final
disposal which are hazardous but which meet the criteria specified in the Landfill Directive and
these will require hazardous waste landfill capacity.
Thermal treatment facilities (except cement kilns) and physical/chemical treatment
facilities generate residues requiring landfill. Incinerators generate bottom ash and fly ash for
disposal. Some of these may be regarded as hazardous wastes:
19 01 05* - filter cake from gas treatment

19 01 07* - solid wastes from gas treatment
19 01 10* - spent activated carbon from flue-gas treatment
19 01 11* - bottom ash and slag containing dangerous substances
19 01 13* - fly ash containing dangerous substances
19 01 15* - boiler dust containing dangerous substances
No such problem exists with cement kilns as all of the ash is incorporated into the
cement clinker.
5 - 16
Similarly, physical/chemical treatment facilities result in treatment products which

require further processing / disposal. Effluents are generated which require appropriate
wastewater treatment prior to discharge, and solid residues (principally insoluble metal oxides
and hydroxides) which require disposal. These residues may be considered hazardous wastes
themselves according to the European Waste Catalogue and the new Integrated Waste List,
including:
19 02 04* - premixed wastes composed of at least one hazardous waste
19 02 05* - sludges from physico/chemical treatment containing dangerous
substances
19 02 11* - other wastes containing dangerous substances
19 03 04* - wastes marked as hazardous, partly stabilised
19 03 06* -wastes marked as hazardous, solidified
In view of this, physical/chemical treatment plants need access to appropriate landfill

capacity. If the solid residues are to be disposed of to landfill without further treatment then
they would need to go to a landfill designated as a “hazardous waste landfill”.
Given the relatively low standard of current landfills and limited in-country experience
in relation to sound hazardous waste management practices, and the lack of any hazardous
waste landfills at present, it is logical to include stabilisation of solid residues prior to landfill.
Following stabilisation, the wastes would, in accordance with the Landfill Directive, be
acceptable for disposal at either a hazardous waste landfill or a non-hazardous waste landfill
and generally classified according to the European Waste Catalogue and the new Integrated
Waste List as:
19 03 05 - stabilised wastes other than those mentioned in 19 03 04
Industrial waste landfills are beginning to appear in Romania but there is a need for
accelerated development of these.
Table 5.5.1 shows the indicative total quantities of inorganic hazardous wastes
generated by Region. If Ilfov and Municipiul Bucharest are combined the generation is
relatively uniform across Romania, ranging from 10,000 tons per annum (tpa) in the South
West Region to 21,000 tpa in the Central Region.
Table 5.5.1 Principally Inorganic Wastes by Region
Region Quantity of Waste
North East 11,299

South East 8,822
South 11,371
South West 6,305
West 7,943
5 - 17
Region Quantity of Waste
North West 10,796

Centre 13,521
Bucharesti 975
Municipality of Bucharest 8878
TOTAL 79,911
Source: JICA Study Team Survey
It is recommended that the Strategy for improving the management of Inorganic Wastes
comprise the following elements:
• The identification and prevention of improper practices (Regulation and
Control activity, see Chapter 8, particularly the massive dilution of wastes to
meet wastewater discharge concentrations.
• The reinstatement / refurbishment of on-site treatment facilities for inorganic
wastes.
• Promotion of the development of small scale flexible regional facilities for
inorganic waste treatment and/or disposal (Hazardous Waste Treatment and
Disposal Facilities – HWTDFs).
The aim would not initially be to develop HWTDFs in every region, rather to develop
three or four initially as pilot facilities. Iridex Group is keen to develop a facility in the
Bucharest region this should be encouraged along with the development of a facility in the
central region and perhaps facilities in the North-West and North-East.
These facilities should comprise basic physical/chemical treatment processes
(oxidation-reduction, neutralisation-precipitation, dewatering, stabilisation, wastewater
treatment and residues landfill). To facilitate the latter these facilities should be located on or
close to a landfill.
2) Options for the Management of Predominantly Organic Wastes

Figures 5.5.1 to 5.5.3 show the distribution of generation of principally organic wastes
by County and by Region.
As already indicated, there are currently several incinerators in industrial enterprises,
two small commercial incinerators and there are operators of rotary cement kilns who are keen
to offer waste management services. So, an intrinsic lack of facilities is not a major issue. The
locations of the major cement kilns are overlaid on Figures 5.5.1 and 5.5.3.
However, it is fair to say that many of the existing incinerators are unlikely to meet EU
standards for emissions and operational monitoring and control. Options for improving the
management of principally organic wastes then include;
• Requiring enterprises with existing treatment facilities to properly maintain
5 - 18
these facilities and use them

• Requiring enterprises to plan for the upgrading of existing facilities to ensure
that they will meet EU standards (currently being transposed into Romanian
standards), or plan for their replacement as necessary to meet proposed
Romanian standards
• Maximise the use of existing commercial facilities (which also need to be
upgraded as an when necessary to comply with the Romanian standards under
development)
• Remove the barriers to the use of cement kilns, these are mainly associated with
willingness to pay
• Plan for the development of strategic centralised/regionalised facilities
Our short term / medium term recommendation is not to focus on the development of
additional thermal treatment systems for industrial waste but to maximise the further
development and appropriate use of existing thermal treatment resources (existing incinerators
and cement kilns).
Currently generators are reluctant to pay even 12 – 15 $ per ton for cement kiln disposal,
this impacts upon the viability of this option and this issue needs to be addressed by effective
enforcement, this in turn will stimulate the investment by cement companies and their
willingness to upgrade operations to full EU standards.
Nevertheless, there is potentially a need for development of strategic thermal treatment
facilities specifically for health-care wastes (in view of the decision to close hospital
`incinerators’ in 2004). There are other project activities looking at this issue and it is logical to
allow those project activities to proceed to their logical conclusion and recommend a
health-care waste management strategy.
5 - 19
Source: JICA Study Team (waste survey data)

Figure 5.5.1 – Oily Waste Generation

Figure 5.5.2 – Non-Halogenated Waste Generation
5 - 20

Figure 5.5.3 – Halogenated Waste Generation
3) Options for the Management of Particularly Difficult Organic Wastes

There are some organic hazardous wastes which are particularly difficult to manage.
These include:
• PCBs
• HCH
• Organic pesticides
• Persistent halogenated solvents
The options for the environmentally sound management of these wastes include:
• Treatment in specially equipped cement kilns
• Treatment in dedicated hazardous waste incinerators
• Physical/chemical treatment processes (e.g. dehydrochlorination of PCBs)
• Export for environmentally sound management in a country with the
necessary facilities
PCB wastes by County and Region are shown in Figure 5.5.4. Currently, no facilities
exist in Romania to take these wastes which are particularly difficult to handle and treat. The
existing Sotem facility could handle small quantities but it is current HolCim policy not to
accept PCB wastes (organic wastes containing > 50 ppm PCBs).
A suitably equipped cement kiln could handle these wastes if blended with other
organic wastes to ensure that the halogen content is within acceptable limits (and PCB content
remains below 50ppm). Such blending processes are a normal pre-processing activity for all
5 - 21
incinerators and cement kilns and should not be considered as contravening rules of not
blending wastes with the objective of reducing hazard. Solid pesticide wastes could also be
processed in a cement kiln, for example by equipping the kiln with a pneumatic canon to propel
fibreboard kegs of solid pesticides into the hot zone of the kiln.
Source: JICA Study Team(waste survey data)

Figure 5.5.4 – PCB Wastes
Barriers to the management of such wastes in cement kilns include:

• The reluctance of kiln operators to accept the more hazardous wastes
• Potential extreme public reaction
• Reasonableness of regulators
The development of a suitable dedicated hazardous waste incinerator, capable of

processing these wastes would be an extremely expensive option (capital cost between 20m
and 50m US$). Potentially a viable alternative, particularly for wastes which will not be
generated in the future is export for destruction in dedicated hazardous waste incineration
facilities.
4) Promoting the Development of Regional Treatment and Disposal Facilities

As indicated, de-facto regional facilities for thermal treatment of wastes are appearing
(e.g. Sotem/HolCim in Campalung). The cement companies are keen to provide a
Romania-wide service and are prepared to invest. The EU Handbook on the Implementation of
the EC Environmental Legislation recommends that `in view of the high costs for most
hazardous waste facilities, Candidate Countries should consider least cost options such as
cement kilns’.
5 - 22
However, regional facilities for physical/chemical treatment of hazardous wastes have

not appeared. Most countries have found it necessary to have a combination of end-of-pipe
hazardous waste management systems in larger enterprises and centralised or regionalised
facilities provided as a commercial service.
It is generally accepted that the management of industrial waste and hazardous
industrial waste should be the responsibility of industry and that the polluter pays principle
should be adopted. Romania is in line with this approach. Nevertheless, it has been the
experience of most countries which have developed an effective hazardous waste management
system that public-sector involvement is necessary to stimulate the development of the system
(see discussions in Volume 2 Annex 2).
A more pro-active approach is therefore necessary to secure their development. This
approach should focus on:
• The identification of priority regions where facility development should be
targeted,
• The identification of potential developers,
• Encouraging those potential developers by raising market awareness and
economic incentives,
STRATEGY
Implementation of awareness raising programmes.
Preventing use of waste management practices which are not environmentally

sound.
Promoting the use of environmentally sound third party waste management

options where treatment and/or disposal at source is impracticable.
Uniform application of appropriate, load based rather than concentration

based, standards for discharge of wastewaters and for emissions must be
established, applied and enforced.
Identification of instances of waste “storage” which are actually “final

disposal” and regulate them as such, ensuring application of relevant standards,
and determine which is “interim storage” and regulate that as such.
5 - 23
STRATEGY
Application of more effective regulation and control, focussing on a compliance

orientated approach.
Application of deterrent sanctions in cases of non-compliance.
Finalisation of Romanian standards for incineration of wastes. Progressive

implementation and enforcement of those standards.
Development of guidelines and standards for cement kiln incineration including

specifications for waste derived fuels.
Identification of thermal treatment facilities which require upgrading to meet

Romanian standards under development.
Development of compliance programmes for upgrading those facilities and

enforcing the implementation of those compliance programmes.
Phased closure of thermal treatment facilities which are not capable of being
upgraded to Romanian standards currently under development linked to the
phased development of environmentally acceptable third party solutions.
Work with the cement companies to promote the incineration of a wider range of
wastes in the cement kilns (pesticides for example) building on experience of
other countries.
Prevention of inappropriate waste management practices which reduce market

demand (e.g. illegitimate trading and use of waste oils). As facilities already
exist (cement kilns / blending facility) this should be a short term priority.
Identification of potential developers of regional physical/chemical treatment

facilities.
Encourage those potential developers to develop small-scale regional facilities,

raising market awareness.
5 - 24
STRATEGY
Stimulate the development of regional facilities by facilitating land allocation

and by provision of economic incentives.
Identification of external factors resulting in poor hazardous waste management

and development of improved integrated approach.
Export, for environmentally sound waste management, of the small quantities of

hazardous organic wastes which are unsuitable for cement kiln incineration (e.g.
PCBs).
5.6 Management Methods for Common Hazardous Wastes
5.6.1 Overview
This section outlines the common waste management methods for common waste types.
The methodologies are described in section 5.6.2 to 5.6.10 and applicability indicated in
Figure.
5.6.2 Oxidation / Reduction

Oxidation / reduction processes are chemical processes which involve changing the
oxidation state of some of the waste constituents. The two processes always occur together, for
something to be oxidised, something else MUST be reduced. The purpose of the process is to
reduce the toxicity of the waste or to convert it to a chemical form more suitable for subsequent
processing.
The most common applications are the oxidation of Cyanides and the reduction of
hexavalent Chromium. Cyanides are oxidised to Cyanates and/or CO2 and NH3 generally
using Sodium or Calcium Hypochlorite or Chlorine gas (the latter less common due to higher
risk associated with reagent storage). Hexavalent chromium is generally reduced (to trivalent
chromium using sodium sulphite, bisulphite or metabisulphite reagent. At centralised merchant
waste treatment facilities, wastes with reducing properties (e.g. ferrous solutions) may be used
as reducing agents. The objective of converting hexavalent chromium to trivalent chromium is
to facilitate precipitation as chromium hydroxide (hexavalent chromium does not form
insoluble hydroxide).
The product of the oxidation / reduction process is a solution for further processing
(neutralisation/precipitation).
5.6.3 Neutralisation / Precipitation

Neutralisation is the adjustment of the pH of a liquid waste or sludge waste. Wastes that
have too low a pH value (acidic) or wastes with too high a pH value (alkaline) will be harmful
5 - 25
to the environment. In addition, neutralisation removes most toxic metals from solution by
precipitating them as hydroxides / oxides. Typically, sodium hydroxide or calcium hydroxide
(lime) are used for neutralisation / precipitation.
Sometimes it is necessary to precipitate metals as sulphides (metal sulphides typically
being far less soluble than hydroxides).
The product of neutralisation / precipitation is a sludge, often with high salt content,
generally further processed by dewatering, and sometimes by stabilisation, before landfill.
5.6.4 Dewatering
Inorganic sludges (principally metal oxides / hydroxides are often dewatered prior to
disposal. The dewatering process may include settling (clarification) and/or filtration.
Filtration technologies include multi-plate filter presses (most flexible / reliable) and vacuum
belt filters.
The products of dewatering are filtrate / effluent for wastewater treatment and
thickened sludge / filtercake for final disposal (with or without stabilisation). Unstabilised filter
cake will generally still be regarded as a hazardous waste.
5.6.5 Stabilisation / Solidification

The terms "Stabilisation” and “Solidification" are often used as generic terms covering
a wide range of physical / chemical processes, including:
• “Stabilisation” - mixing of the waste with additives which form inorganic
"polymer" which prevents leaching of toxic constituents. Processes usually based
around the addition of one or more of the following materials - cement, lime, fly
ash, sodium silicate, perhaps with other minor additives.
• “Solidification” - similar process to stabilisation with the exception that the
mixture is initially wetter and formulated so as to set into a monolithic solid mass.
• “Encapsulation” - here, the objective is to physically encapsulate (rather than
chemically bond) waste within a solid material.
• “Vitrification” - as its name suggests, this entails fusing the waste, generally with
silica materials to form an inert glass-like substance.
The most common process is the first (stabilisation) and is widely used to process metal
hydroxide / oxide / sulphide sludges and filtercakes (e.g. galvanic sludges) to give a waste
which is regarded as non-hazardous for simple final disposal.
5.6.6 Shredding / Maceration

Shredding is a mechanical process used to break apart monolithic solids or articles
prior to further processing or to reduce the particle size of solids in sludges. The process is used
for both dry wastes and for sludges. Typical uses would be to process a waste prior to physical
/ chemical treatment facilitating better treatment by increasing surface area for reaction, or to
5 - 26
enable improved combustion.

Maceration is also a mechanical process and reduces the particle size of solids in a
sludge. The process is often utilised to enable a heavy sludge to be pumped more easily, for
example to prepare organic sludges for incineration, either via direct feed to a kiln or prior to
blending.
5.6.7 Blending
Wastes of similar character and composition, requiring the same treatment and disposal
operations may be mixed or blended prior to treatment. For example, prior to Incineration, the
majority of wastes are pre-processed and blended.
The objective behind the blending operation is to generate a waste with optimum
specification for processing, in this case incineration. This is both from the point of view of
effective treatment and also from the viewpoint of cost-effective processing.
5.6.8 Incineration
Incineration is the most common thermal treatment process used for hazardous wastes.
It is an Oxidation process. Technologies range from very basic to highly complex.
For effective incineration, there are five main requirements:
• Proper preparation of the waste prior to incineration.
• The 3 "Ts" common to thermal treatment processes (“Time” - minimum of two
seconds at required temperature, required “Temperature” –minimum of 850oC or
1100oC for wastes with more than 1% of halogen content and “Turbulence”
(mixing).
• Presence of sufficient oxygen for complete oxidation of wastes.
In addition to the five basic requirements, the preparation of waste prior to incineration
is crucially important. Preprocessing may include:
• Sorting: Wastes received are sorted into different types, for example:
Halogenated / non-halogenated,
High / medium / low calorific value,
High / low solids content
• Shredding: Solid wastes may be shredded prior to incineration
• Maceration: Semi-solid (sludge) wastes with large particle sizes may be macerated
prior to incineration
• Blending: This involves mixing the sorted wastes together to form a blend of
wastes to a particular specification for feeding through the different incinerator
feed systems.
5 - 27
The most common incineration technologies are rotary kiln, static hearth kiln and
liquid injection kiln. These are “primary” combustion chambers and incinerators often have
secondary combustion chambers to ensure complete combustion of product gases and fly ash.
The products of combustion are bottom ash, fly ash and gaseous emissions (principally
CO2 and H2O but also trace organic compounds and often acidic gases such as HCl, SOx and
NOx) Incinerators are generally equipped with sophisticated gas cleaning systems which
neutralise acid gases formed during combustion, remove particulate from the gas stream and, in
some cases, absorb trace organic compounds. The two most common technologies for gas
cleaning are spray dry adsorption / baghouse filter and alkaline wet scrubbing. Electrostatic
precipitators (wet or dry) have also been used alone or in combination with one of the other
technologies.
Bottom ash is generally non-hazardous and is landfilled, fly ash and solid residues from
gas cleaning are generally treated as hazardous wastes and are often stabilised before final
disposal to landfill.
5.6.9 Cement Kiln Incineration

Cement kilns have many features in common with dedicated hazardous waste
incinerators, specifically:
• They use rotary kiln technology,
• They operate at very high temperatures (far higher in fact than dedicated hazardous
waste incinerators),
• They have long residence times for solids and gas (again longer than dedicated
incinerators),
• They have the capability of removing acid gases generated during combustion due
to strongly alkaline environment in the kiln,
• The kilns design promotes mixing (turbulence) due to rotation and due to counter
current flow of combustion gases.
In addition, cement kilns have the advantage that any combustion ash produced is
incorporated into the cement clinker.
For these reasons, cement kilns are potentially valuable resources for the management
of organic hazardous wastes and are widely utilised and capable of meeting the most stringent
standards.
Although cement kilns are highly flexible they cannot generally handle wastes with
halogen contents as high as can be handled in dedicated incinerators.
5.6.10 Landfill
Landfill is used as a disposal method for hazardous waste. Landfills receiving
hazardous wastes must be designated as “hazardous waste” landfills. Typically such landfills
are used for the disposal of large volumes of low hazard wastes, e.g. mining wastes, disposal of
5 - 28
asbestos wastes and for disposal of residues from physical / chemical treatment and wastewater
treatment.
It is an EU requirement that liquid wastes are not landfilled and that any hazardous
wastes should be treated prior to landfill as far as practicable to reduce the hazardous nature of
the waste. This in effect dictates stabilisation of physical / chemical treatment residues and
incineration residues prior to landfilling.
5.6.11 Cost of Hazardous Waste Management

The cost of hazardous waste management varies widely depending on the specific type
of waste and whether it is in bulk or packaged. Waste management contractors often do not
have any fixed pricing structure but charge the prices that they believe the market will bear. The
prices have been rather static in recent years. The following table shows ranges of prices in
European countries and Malaysia based on a number of reviews undertaken between 1991 and
1999.
Unit: US dollar
Solidification
Country PCT Incineration Landfill
and landfill
Denmark 168-290 250 - 1200 - 150 - 145
Finland 440 555 - -
France 50 - 900 215 - 900 - 25 - 60
Germany 50 - 500 200 - 2200 640 40 - 240
Italy 150 - 2000 - - 40 - 170
Netherlands 300 - 700 100 - 1300 - -
Spain 40 - 400 - - 30
Sweden 330 600 - -
UK 40 - 600 150 - 2000 - 30 - 200
Malaysia 440 - 1150 190 - 1090 230 - 250 135 - 150
Source: ERM various waste disposal charges reviews, 1991 – 1999
Malaysia data is for 2000
5 - 29
Treatment Methods for Common Waste Types
Figure 5.6.1
5 - 30
Figure 5.6.1 Treatment Methods for Common Waste Types (continued)

5 - 31

Final Report
(1) Landfill of treated residues only - not landfill of untreated wastes
(2) Bottom ash generally does not need stabilisation
(3) An orange tick means that these treatment processes may sometimes be use for some types of these wastes.
References:
David Newby Associates

Environmental Resources Management, “waste disposal charges reviews”, 1991-2000
ICIM 2002 Survey Data
ISWA (International Solid Waste Association) 1999
MoWEP / JICA study team
UK Environment Agency
5 - 32

Treatment and Disposal of Hazardous Waste

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Treatment and Disposal of Hazardous Waste

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Treatment and Disposal of Hazardous Waste

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 5

Treatment and Disposal of

5. Treatment and Disposal of Hazardous Waste

5.1 Current Conditions

Figure 5.2.1 – Proximity Hierarchy

Source: David Newby Associates

Waste generation Analysis / Storage Primary Treatment Secondary Treatment Disposal

Minimise No Meets Yes Wastewater Meets Yes

No Meets Physical / Effluent Meets

Reuse / Pending Limits?

Volume 1 Main Report: Strategy and Action Plan

Source: David Newby Associates

5.3 Identification and Assessment of Existing Facilities

5.3.1 Interim Storage of Hazardous Waste

5.3.2 Waste Treatment and Disposal at Source

5.3.3 Waste “Storage”

5.3.4 Waste Collection and Transportation

5.3.5 Waste Treatment and Disposal Off-site

Petrom, Fixed hearth, Caustic soda Oil wastes. No (awaiting No

Volume 1 Main Report: Strategy and Action Plan

Source: MoWEP/JICA Study Team

1) Principally Organic Industrial Wastes

Figure 5.3.1 – Sotem Organic Waste Blending Facility

Source: JICA Study Team

Figure 5.3.2 – Blended Waste Feed System at Cement Kiln

Source: JICA Study Team

2) Principally Inorganic Wastes

Source: MoWEP/JICA Study Team

Volume 1 Main Report: Strategy and Action Plan

Table 5.3.3 Hazardous Waste Treatment Methods in 2002

RECYCLING OPERATIONS for hazardous waste (2002) Code %

DISPOSAL OPERATIONS for hazardous waste (2002) Code %

Table 5.3.4 Industrial Landfills by Categories

Table 5.3.5 Landfills by Hazard Categories

5.4 Objectives and Targets

In addition, in line with Romania’s policy of EU Accession, the objectives are to

5.5.1 Basic Concept

5.5.2 Waste Generation and Interim Storage

Implementation of awareness raising programmes.

Promotion of waste avoidance and minimisation projects via incentives.

Introduction of regulatory provisions to promote avoidance and minimisation

Identification of existing practices at enterprises and development of

Remediation of inadequate facilities for intermediate storage and waste

Development of EU compatible standards for storage, treatment and disposal of

Progressive implementation and enforcement of those standards.

Identification of external factors resulting in poor hazardous waste management

Development and implementation of an improved data collection system linked

Promotion of the development of Romanian capacity for undertaking avoidance

Promotion of industry uptake of avoidance and minimisation projects by

5.5.3 Waste Treatment and Disposal

1) Options for the Management of Predominantly Inorganic Wastes

Whilst existing treatment technologies in industries may be low-technology, many

The “compliance program” type mechanism could be implemented with existing

19 01 05* - filter cake from gas treatment

Similarly, physical/chemical treatment facilities result in treatment products which

In view of this, physical/chemical treatment plants need access to appropriate landfill

Region Quantity of Waste

North East 11,299