358 



encourage a systematic and rational supervision by domestic authorities over 

 dumping activities, and should assist them in preventing excessive accumulations 

 of ordinarily non-harmful substiinces which might otherwise have escaped oflScial 

 attention. 



V. Alternative Methods of Waste Disposal 



Any significant reduction in the disposal of wastes at sea will probably re- 

 quire the development of alternative land disposal methods, techniques for uti- 

 lizing waste products, or ways of reducing the production of wastes. If acceptable 

 techniques cannot be found the restricticms contemplated by the Convention 

 might produce some degradation of the land environment although it is diffi- 

 cult to give such effects a precise quantitative expression in the abstract. More- 

 over, in some cases the alternative of disposing of wastes on land may prove 

 more costly than ocean duminng although here too much will depend on the spe- 

 cific situation. 



A detailed discussion of the technical and economic implications of the alter- 

 natives to ocean dumping may be found in Chapter III of the CEQ Report on 

 Ocean Dumping. A National Policy and the following paragraphs summarize some 

 of the principal statements in this regard in that report although the reader is 

 urged to read the full text in its entirety. 



The types of wastes for which alternatives to ocean dumping are outlined in 

 the CEQ report include: solid waste, dredge spoils, sewage dredge, industrial 

 wastes, construction and demolition debris, radioactive wastes, and explosive 

 and chemical munitions. 



Although dredge spoils and industrial wastes are the two largest sources of 

 ocean dumping, solid waste is discussed first because the alternatives are largely 

 applicable to the other wastes dumped in the ocean. 



Solid waste. — The amount of solid waste dumped in the ocean is not yet sig- 

 nificant, less than 1 percent of all wastes disposed of in the ocean. However, 

 many communities are beginning to look to the ocean as a place to dispose of 

 solid waste in light of increasing population ; increasing per capita rates of solid 

 waste generation ; and the declining capacity, increasing costs, and lack of nearby 

 land disposal sites. If many coastal cities were to dump solid waste in the ocean, 

 many millions of tons would be introduced annually into the marine environment. 



Looking at the alternatives to ocean dumping nationwide the U.S. landfill 

 capacity is generally adequate and the average time remaining for currently 

 used landfills in all metropolitan areas is 16 years. However, some large metro- 

 politan areas will soon exhaust their existing sites. 



Thus, in the long-term several alternatives to ocean dumping of solid waste 

 appear indicated. New land .sites must be developed. Incinerators also may have 

 to be constructed. (By reducing the volume, i>ossibly up to 90 percent, the cities 

 can prolong the use of existing sites by many years.) 



The CEQ report i)oints out that the barriers to acquiring new sites are politi- 

 cal and financial. Some communities are reUictant to be the dumping ground for 

 the wastes of large metropolitan areas, and the transport of wastes of large 

 distant sites increases costs. The barriers to the construction of new incinerators 

 al.so are largely financial since they are expensive to build and to operate. More 

 stringent air pollution standards will add to the capital and operating costs. 



On balance, the CEQ report concludes that the additional costs for use of 

 rail haul and land disposal instead of ocean dumping are not so high when the 

 distances are comparable. For example, when the wastes are tran.sported 50 or 

 100 miles by either method, the costs of land disposal are less than 10 percent 

 higher. 



Moreover if conducted correctly, the report concludes rail haul and land 

 dispo.sal ofifer an economically attractive method of disposing of solid waste. 

 It also goes on to state that a stronger regional approach to waste management, 

 better di.sposal operations, and adequate payment for the use of land could well 

 overcome those barriers that exist to such methods. 



One possible alternative which is extensively discussed deals with the u.se 

 of abandoned strip mines. Because of the small incremental costs involved in 

 rail haul, the report states that large coastal cities could haul their wastes 

 to these mines economically. Moreover, adequate land for this application 

 api^ears available since nationwide, surface mining has disturbed over .3.2 million 

 acres of land. And the Department of the Interior estimates that over two- 

 thirds of this acreage is completely luireclaimed. Thus apprr.ximalely :},.300 

 square miles of potential solid waste disposal sites may be availal)le and since 

 there is ready access to almost all this land, the report concludes that "if legal 



