Options for management of municipal solid waste in New York City: a preliminary comparison of health risks and policy implications.

Landfill disposal and waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration remain the two principal options for managing municipal solid waste (MSW). One critical determinant of the acceptability of these options is the different health risks associated with each. In this analysis relying on published data and exposure modeling, we have performed health risk assessments for landfill disposal versus WTE treatment options for the management of New York City's MSW. These are based on the realistic scenario of using a waste transfer station (WTS) in Brooklyn and then transporting the untreated MSW by truck to a landfill in Pennsylvania or using a WTE facility in Brooklyn and then transporting the resultant ash by truck to a landfill in Pennsylvania. The overall results indicate that the individual cancer risks for both options would be considered generally acceptable, although the risk from landfilling is approximately 5 times greater than from WTE treatment; the individual non-cancer health risks for both options would be considered generally unacceptable, although once again the risk from landfilling is approximately 5 times greater than from WTE treatment. If one considers only the population in Brooklyn that would be directly affected by the siting of either a WTS or a WTE facility in their immediate neighborhood, individual cancer and non-cancer health risks for both options would be considered generally acceptable, but risks for the former remain considerably higher than for the latter. These results should be considered preliminary due to several limitations of this study such as: consideration of risks only from inhalation exposures; assumption that only volume and not composition of the waste stream is altered by WTE treatment; reliance on data from the literature rather than actual measurements of the sites considered, assuming comparability of the sites. However, the results of studies such as this, in conjunction with ecological, socioeconomic and equity considerations, should prove useful to environmental managers, regulators, policy makers, community representatives and other stakeholders in making sound and acceptable decisions regarding the optimal handling of MSW.

[1]  M. Schuhmacher,et al.  PCDD/F concentrations in soil and vegetation in the vicinity of a municipal waste incinerator after a pronounced decrease in the emissions of PCDD/Fs from the facility. , 2001, Chemosphere.

[2]  Paul T. Williams.  Waste Treatment and Disposal , 1998 .

[3]  W. F. Sandusky,et al.  Wind Energy Resource Atlas of the United States , 1987 .

[4]  M. Wey,et al.  Heat treatment of incinerator retired sorbents containing heavy metals. , 2001, The Science of the total environment.

[5]  M. Kogevinas,et al.  Biomonitoring Study of People Living near or Working at a Municipal Solid-Waste Incinerator Before and After Two Years of Operation , 2000, Archives of environmental health.

[6]  J. J. Lin,et al.  Memory effect on the dioxin emissions from municipal waste incinerator in Taiwan. , 2001, Chemosphere.

[7]  L. Tuxen,et al.  Integrated risk information system (IRIS) , 1990 .

[8]  A. Schecter,et al.  Dioxin levels in blood of municipal incinerator workers , 1991 .

[9]  Ronald E. Hester,et al.  Health effects and landfill sites , 2002 .

[10]  D. Raha,et al.  Toxicological screening of chemical emissions from municipal solid waste landfills. application of a predictive framework to a state‐of‐the‐art facility , 1997 .

[11]  Hans Tammemagi,et al.  The waste crisis : landfills, incinerators, and the search for a sustainable future , 1999 .

[12]  Lesley Rushton,et al.  Health hazards and waste management. , 2003, British medical bulletin.

[13]  Robert E. Landreth,et al.  Municipal Solid Wastes: Problems and Solutions , 1997 .

[14]  W. T. Davis,et al.  Air Pollution: Its Origin and Control , 1976 .

[15]  Ishrat Chaudhuri,et al.  Multiple Pathway Health Risk Assessment and Multimedia Environmental Monitoring Programs for a Municipal Waste Resource Recovery Facility in Maryland , 2004 .

[16]  S. Kumagai,et al.  Polychlorinated Dibenzo-p-dioxin and Dibenzofuran Concentrations in Serum Samples of Workers at an Infectious Waste Incineration Plant in Japan , 2005, Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene.

[17]  C C Lee,et al.  Regulatory framework for the thermal treatment of various waste streams. , 2000, Journal of hazardous materials.

[18]  R. Malkin,et al.  Blood lead levels in incinerator workers. , 1992, Environmental research.

[19]  Montse Meneses,et al.  Health risk assessment of emissions of dioxins and furans from a municipal waste incinerator: comparison with other emission sources. , 2004, Environment international.

[20]  Céline Boudet,et al.  Health Risk Assessment of a Modern Municipal Waste Incinerator , 1999 .

[21]  Jia-Yeong Ku,et al.  Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Mixing Depth over the Northeastern United States during the Summer of 1995 , 1999 .

[22]  Steven Cohen,et al.  Understanding Environmental Policy , 2006 .

[23]  Richard G. Derwent,et al.  Analysis and interpretation of air quality data from an urban roadside location in Central London over the period from July 1991 to July 1992 , 1995 .

[24]  Ching Hua Lee,et al.  Exposure assessment of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs) in temporary municipal-waste-incinerator maintenance workers before and after annual maintenance. , 2006, Chemosphere.