Chapter 9: Waste Management - soer.deat.gov.zasoer.deat.gov.za/dm_documents/Chapter_9__Waste... ·...

2012 SOUTH AFRICA ENVIRONMENT OUTLOOK

Chapter 9: Waste Management

Draft 2 version 3

April 2012

2012 SAOE Waste Chapter Draft 2

1

Contents

Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 3

Abbreviations ......................................................................................................................................... 5

1 Introduction and background ........................................................................................................... 7

2 The waste management hierarchy approach ................................................................................... 8

3 Legal mandates and functional responsibilities ............................................................................. 10

3.1 Enabling legal framework ........................................................................................................ 10

3.2 Roles and responsilities ........................................................................................................... 10

3.3 Mechanisims to effect South Africa’s international waste obligations ................................... 12

3.4 Performance monitoring ......................................................................................................... 14

4 The socio-economic contribution of South Africa’s waste management system .......................... 14

4.1 Employment creation .............................................................................................................. 15

4.2 Muncipal revenue .................................................................................................................... 17

4.3 Capital investment in the waste sector ................................................................................... 17

5 Waste generation and trends in South Africa ................................................................................ 18

5.1 General waste .......................................................................................................................... 19

5.1.1 Municipal solid waste ....................................................................................................... 19

5.1.2 Building and Demolition waste ......................................................................................... 23

5.1.3 Tyres ................................................................................................................................ 23

5.1.4 Industrial packaging ...................................................................................................... 24

5.2 Hazardous waste ..................................................................................................................... 25

5.2.1 Healthcare Risk Waste ...................................................................................................... 28

5.2.2 Pesticides .......................................................................................................................... 30

5.2.3 eWaste .............................................................................................................................. 30

5.2.4 Mining waste .................................................................................................................... 31

5.2.5 Metallurgical waste .......................................................................................................... 32

5.2.6 Commercial wastes ........................................................................................................... 32

6 Waste initiatives in South Africa..................................................................................................... 33

6.1 National policy response ......................................................................................................... 33

6.2 Provincial government’s response .......................................................................................... 34

6.3 Local government’s response .................................................................................................. 36

7 Waste recycling industry in South Africa........................................................................................ 37

8 Waste treatment and disposal in South Africa ............................................................................... 38

9 Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement ..................................................................................... 39


2

9.1.1 Environmental Management Inspectorate (EMI) ............................................................. 40

9.1.2 Status of the Environmental Management Inspectorate (EMI) ....................................... 41

9.1.3 Waste management officers (WMO) ............................................................................... 42

10 Conclusions and emerging issues ................................................................................................. 44

References ............................................................................................................................................ 49


3

Executive Summary

South Africa’s commitment to sustainable development is aimed at balancing the broader

economic and social challenges of a developing and unequal society while protecting

environmental resources. For the waste sector, this means care is given to raw material use,

product design, resource efficiency, waste prevention, and minimization where avoidance is

impossible. However, South Africa’s growing economy and population result in increased

waste generation now and in the near future.

Sustainability and improvement of waste management services in South Africa remains a

significant challenge for the government. These challeneges are further complemented by

national policy positions regarding, acceleration of service delivery, ensuring equity for

waste services, poverty alliviation and employment creation. A number of conclusions can

be drawn from the present national status reporting on waste management.

Firstly, it is clear that specific focus is placed in South Africa on the application of the waste

management hiereachy both in policies, strategies and implementation.

Secondly, since the last environmental reporting reporting in 2006, a number of key policy

and regulatory instruments within the ambit of the new promalgated Waste Act, has been

developed. These include e.g. national policy for the provision of basic refuse removal

services to indegent households; national policy on thermal treatment of general and

hazardous waste; national domestic waste management collection standards; waste

classification and management regulations (draft); waste tyre regullation; regulations on

prohibition of the use, manufacturing, import and export of asbestos and asbestos

containing materials.

Thirdly, clear roles and responsibilities of government institutions and the legislative

mandates for key spheres of government involved in waste management has been

developed and are in place. South Africa remains in the forefront on environmental waste

management amongst developing countries and is committed to implement a world class

system that will improve waste management in the country. The key development areas for

the near future include: (i) Service level agreements and contracting of services amongst

key role players in government, (ii) regionalisation of service delivery, and (iii) ring-fencing

of solid waste finances.

Fourthly, that municipal solid waste management can be identified as one of the areas of

municipal functioning with the greatest potential for job creation, particularly with respect to

unskilled or semi-skilled labour. The estimate employment creation by the total waste sector

is around 113,000 people. It is estimated that the total annual expenditure on solid waste

management in South Africa is R10 billion per annum, 70% from the public sector, largely

local government, while 30% is private sector expenditure. Waste management within

municipailities contributes significantly towards municipal income and revenue due to the

user-pay principle applied for waste management. It is assessed that municipalities received

a total income of around R6.5 billion for solid waste.

Fifthly, that the analysis of the two main waste classess, i.e. general and hazardous waste,

shows a number of interesting findings:


4

• Municipalities are the key players in dealing with general non-hazardous waste. A

total of around 239 municipalities performed solid waste management functions

servicing around 8,4 mill households, or around 64 % of all households

• South Africa has experienced rapid growth in waste volumes, associated with a

prolonged period of economic growth. During the last decade, general waste

generation rose to nearly 67 million cubic metres, or by 62%. This represents an

annual average growth rate of around 5%

• The big metropolitan municipalities continue to allocate more budgets, appoint better

qualified staff, and have well organised structures to deliver waste services.

However, there is still a strong need for continued strengthening and expansion of

waste services to reach people still without access. The overall backlog in the

provision of solid waste services is around 2 million households, with some 900,000

households not receiving any service. The service backlogs are highest in metros and

secondary cities

• Waste recycling presents an opportunity to save resources, reduce the environmental

impact of waste by reducing the amount of waste disposed at landfills, and create

employment opportunities. In South Africa, the majority of commercial waste

recycling initiatives has been developed on an ad hoc basis and has been driven by

the private sector, with little or no financial inputs or support from the government

• Waste management services rely heavily on landfills for the disposal of waste, as

over 90% of all South Africa's waste is disposed of at landfill sites. The reliance on

waste disposal by landfills has limited the incentive to devise alternative methods of

dealing with waste

• For hazardous waste, a general lack of adequate reliable information exists making

quantifying mass balance for hazardous wastes difficult. South Africa currently has

11 licenced hazardous treatment facilities in operation with a combined annual

treatment capacity of approximately 57,600 tons. The current treatment figures

indicate a reserve treatment capacity of approximately 1,000 tons per month.

A number of specific waste issues has emerged during the last years. Of particular interest

are e-waste streams, waste-to-energy and the green economy noted.


5

Abbreviations

CDM Cleaner Development Mechanism

CFCs Chlorofluorocarbons

CFLs Compact Fluorescent Lamps

COGTA Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs

DEA Department of Environmental Affairs

DTI Department of Trade and Industry

DPLG Department of Provincial and Local Government

DWAF Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (former)

EMI Environmental Management Inspector

ERP Extended Producer Responsibility

HCRW Healthcare Risk Waste

HW Hazardous Waste

IDP Integrated Development Plans

IT Information technology

IPWMP Integrated Pollution and Waste Management Policy

IWMP Integrated Waste Management Plans

MEC Member of the Executive Council

MFMA Municipal Finance Management Act

MIG Municipal Infrastructure Grant

MRF Materials Recycling Facility

MTEF Medium Term Expenditure Framework

NCMS National Compliance Monitoring System

NECSA Nuclear Energy Corporation of South Africa

NEMWA National Environmental Management: Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008)

NEMA National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998)


6

NWIS National waste information system

NWMS National Waste Management strategy

ODS Ozone Depletion Substance

PCBs Polychlorinated Biphenyls

PIC Prior Informed Consent

PCF Prototype Carbon Fund

POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants

RSA Republic of South Africa

WEEE Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment


7

CHAPTER 9: WASTE MANAGEMENT

1 Introduction and background

South Africa’s commitment to sustainable development is aimed at balancing the broader

economic and social challenges of a developing and unequal society while protecting

environmental resources. For the waste sector in South Africa this means care is given to

raw material use, product design, resource efficiency, waste prevention, and minimization

where avoidance is impossible.

However, South Africa’s growing economy and population result in increased waste

generation now and in the near future stressing the importance of establishing effective

waste management policies and programs. A number of issues continue to be challenges for

the establishment of effective waste management. These includes e.g. ineffective data

collection systems and lack of complience and enforcement capacity; lack of education and

awareness amongst stakeholders within the waste sector; operational costs for management

of waste; political instability and support to waste reduction at local government level;

availability of suitable land for waste disposal, and lack of structured incentives for

reduction, recycling and/or re-use of waste.

In this chapter, an overview of the status of waste management in South Africa is

presented, based on key drivers within the waste sector in South Africa. Firstly, specific

focus is placed on the waste management hiereachy within the context of South Africa’s

National Waste Management Strategy (NWMS), and National Environmental Management:

Waste Act (Act 59 of 2008) (NEMWA). It is according to this waste management hierachy

that all waste management practices across the country are analysed.

Secondly, the South African waste management policy framework is presented. Attention is

drawn towards national and international legislation and how it has affected the dicision of

waste management mandatory functions within the spheres government, particularly in the

last few years. Attention is further given to the shift in policy and legislative direction since

promalgation of the National Environmental Management: Waste Act (NEMWA), the

adoption of the National Waste Management Strategy, waste policies and regulations.

Thirdly, the roles and responsibilities of government institutions and the legislative mandates

for key spheres of government are presented, including a presentation of the Government’s

performace management system, specifically Outcome 10 in relation to waste management,

and international waste obligations. A synthetic view on key responsibilities in the provision

of waste management services across the spectrum is presented. Challenges and

opportunities regarding the management of waste are highlighted.

Fourthly, an analysis of the two main waste classess, i.e. genaral (or municipal) waste and

hazardous waste are reported upon. For general waste, generation trends for the following

waste types are covered: Municipal waste, construction and demolition, waste tyres and

industrial packaging. For hazourdous waste focus is given to health care waste, pesticides,

e-waste, metallurgical waste and other hazardous waste streams, like batteries and


8

flourescent lamps. An overview, based on the waste management hierarchy, is presented

for each waste stream.

Finally, the country’s response to waste management challenges is presented. Specifically,

focus is given to developments around national policy and legislation, waste treatment,

recycling and disposal. Compliance monitoring and enforcement structures are analysed with

regard to established legislated arrangements that include the designation of an

environmental management inspectorate and waste management officers. Key emerging

issues are identified.

A pilot project conducted by the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), in partnership

with the Mafikeng local municipality, to demontrate employment creation through a

community based waste management model, is presented in a case study.

2 The waste management hierarchy approach

The definition of waste derived from the Waste Act states that: “waste” means any

substance, whether or not that substance can be reduced, re-used, recycled and recovered:

a) That is surplus, unwanted, rejected, discarded, abandoned or disposed of b) Which the generator has no further use of for the purposes of production

c) That must be treated or disposed of

d) That is identified as a waste by the Minister by notice in the Gazette, and includes waste generated by the mining, medical or other sector, but (i) a by-product is not

considered waste; and (ii) any portion of waste, once re-used, recycled and

recovered, ceases to be waste.

In this definition, the impact on human health does not feature, however, this aspect is

covered in several sections of the Act in relation to descriptions of “general waste” and

“hazardous waste”.

With respect to (d)(ii) of the Act, “re-used” and “recycled” refers to processes that have

been completed, whereas “recovered” (or recovery) refers to resource materials extracted

from the waste stream with the intention to use as inputs into newer products. This will

normally be applicable to commonly “recovered” waste materials like paper, plastics, glass

and metal cans or scrap and hence they cease to be waste at that stage of “recovery”.

The waste management hierarchy provides a technical approach to the understanding of

waste and is South Africa’s adopted approach to waste management. Management of waste

through the hierarchy approach is an recognised model for the proioritisation of waste

management options, throughout the world. This approach was first introduced in South

Africa in 2000. It offers a holistic approach to management of waste materials, and provides

a systematic method for waste management during the potential waste product lifecycle

addressing in turn waste avoidance, reduction, re-use, recycling, recovery, treatment, and

safe disposal as a last resort. Through NEMWA, the model is further entrenched in the legal

framework governing waste in the country. The waste hierarchy, as presented in Figure 1, is

linked to national policy action plans on waste management.


9

The South African Waste legislation is influenced and informed by the key elements of the

waste management hierarchy, and therefore dictates the overall strategic approach for

waste management. The waste hierarchy is also clearly visible in the 2011 National Waste

Management Strategy for South Africa.

Figure 1 Waste management hierarchy as per the National Waste Managament Strategy (DEA, 2011)

This approach towards waste management put emphasis on the following key elements:

• Avoidance and Reduction: Products and materials must be designed in a manner that

minimises their waste components or in a manner that reduces natural material

quantities used and potential toxicity of waste generated during the production, and

after use

• Re-use: Materials can be used in a similar or different purpose without changing

form or properties. This approach seeks to re-use a product when it reaches the end

of its life span. In this way, it becomes inputs for new products and materials

• Recycle: This involves separating materials from the waste stream and processing

them as products or raw materials. The first elements of the waste management

hierarchy are the foundation of cradle-to-cradle waste management

• Recovery: Reclaiming particular components or materials or using the waste as a

fuel. Where the quantity of waste cannot be further reduced, they will be discharged

to landfill. Landfill is presently considered the most affordable way to manage the

final stage of waste

• Treatment and disposal: This is a “last resort” within the hierarchy of waste

management measures. Treatment refers to any process that is designed to

minimize the environmental impact of waste by changing the physical properties of

Waste avoidance and reduction

Re-use

Recycling

Recovery

Treatment/Disposal


10

waste or separating out and destroying toxic components of waste. Disposal refers

specifically to the depositing or burial of waste onto, or into, land. Treatment,

processing and disposal of waste must take place in accordance with the principles

of environmental justice and equitable access to environmental services as

articulated in the National Environmental Management Act 107 of 1998 (NEMA).

3 Legal mandates and functional responsibilities

3.1 Enabling legal framework

South Africa’s legal framework on waste management is one of the most progressive on the

continent. There is a clear division of roles, responsibilities, and mandatory obligations for

the three spheres of government. This alignment of the law governing waste, demonstrates

the country’s ambition towards a clean environment and healthy society.

According to the Constitution, everyone has the right to an environment that is not harmful

to health or well-being (section 24, Chapter 2). This fundamental right underpins all

environmental policies and legislations, in particular the framework environmental legislation

established by the National Environmental Management Act, 1998 (Act No. 107 of 1998)

(NEMA).

The Constitution further assigns legislative competence to national and provincial

government with respect to environment and pollution control (Constitution, section 146). It

assigns exclusive legislative competence to the local government in matters of cleansing and

refuse removal, refuse dumps and solid waste disposal. Section 156(1)(a) of the

Constitution, read with Schedule 5, assigns this responsibility for refuse removal, refuse

dumps, solid waste disposal and cleansing to local government.

The National Environmental Management Act provides instruments for integrated waste

management. It also places a ‘duty of care’ on any juristic person who may cause significant

pollution or degradation of the environment. It requires them to institute measures to either

prevent pollution from occurring, or to minimise and rectify the pollution or degradation

where it cannot reasonably be avoided.

Based on the NEMA framework, the most innovative feature of the NEMWA is the preference

for the regionalisation of solid waste management services. The Act also place considerable

emphasis on the development of an integrated waste planning system, through the

development of integrated waste management plans (IWMP) by all spheres of government

and industry waste for specified waste generators identified by the national and / or

provincial Minister.

3.2 Roles and responsilities

The National Government, and in particular the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA),

is ultimately responsible for ensuring that the NEMWA is implemented and that the various

provisions are harnessed in the most appropriate and effective way possible. The Waste Act

specifies various mandatory and discretionary provisions that the DEA must address. In

terms of mandatory provisions, the DEA is responsible for:


11

• Establishing the National Waste Management Strategy

• Setting national norms and standards

• Establishing and maintaining a National Contaminated Land Register

• Establishing and maintaining a National Waste Information System

• Preparing and implementing a National Integrated Waste Management Plan.

Provinces are the primary regulatory authorities for waste activities, except for activities for

which the Minister is the authority. It must promote and ensure the implementation of the

National Waste Management Strategy and national norms and standards. Provinces have a

number of discretionary powers, some of which may only be exercised in consultation with

the Minister e.g. setting provincial norms and standards, declaring priority wastes, listing of

waste management activities, registering waste transporters, requesting the preparation of

industry waste management plans, identifying contaminated land and establishing provincial

waste information systems.

Municipalities must provide waste management services, which include waste removal,

storage and disposal services, as per Schedule 5b of the Constitution. Municipalities are

expected to facilitate local solutions such as material recovery facilities and buy-back

centres, rather than provide the entire recycling infrastructure themselves. They must also

submit integrated waste management plans (IWMP) to the competent provincial authorities,

and the municipal annual performance report must include information on the

implementation of the IWMP. This plans, like all other key municipal deliverables, must be

incorporated in the Integrated Development Plan (IDP).

At their discretion, municipalities may set local waste service standards for waste separation,

compacting, management and disposal of solid waste, amongst others. Local standards

must be aligned with any provincial and national standards where these exist. Table 1

provide a summary of allocation of waste management functions.

Area Function Activity Current assignment Issue

Nat Prov Local Pvt

Policy Making

Standard Setting

Norms and standards Access targets

X X

X X

What is to be provided

Planning Plans for service expansion

Plans for service improvements

X X

X X

X

Adequate facilities and services

Service

Provision

Assets

Creation

Social capital

Physical capital

X

X

X

Adequate facilities and

services

Financing Tariffs

Subsidies to consumers Grants to service

providers

X

X

X

Financial sustainability

Operations Consumer selection Recurrent expenditure

General area cleansing Minimization

Collection Transportation

X

X X

X X

Effective and sustainable service


12

Disposal

Maintenance Staffing

X

X X

Regulation Monitoring and

evaluation

Economic Finance

Operational Monitoring & Evaluation

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X X

Quality of service delivery

Table 1 Allocation of Solid Waste Management Functions (DEA , 2007)

3.3 Mechanisims to effect South Africa’s international waste obligations

South Africa recognises the importance of international cooperation in dealing with complex

waste management issues, particulalry as it applies to highly dangerous materials and

internationally prioritised waste streams. As such, the country has acceeded to various

international agreements related to waste management, non-binding conventions and

protocols relevant to waste management.

The Waste Act (section 6.(1)(b)) requires that the National Waste Management Strategy to

establish “mechanisms, systems and procedures to give effect to the Republic’s obligations

in terms of relevant international agreements”. There are various international

agreements/conventions and protocols that relate to waste management, and to which

South Africa has acceded, including:

• The Basel Convention, 1989, dealing with the controlling the transboundary

movement of hazardous waste

• The Montreal Protocol, 1989, which focuses on phasing out ozone depleting

substances (many of which can be classified as waste)

• The Rotterdam Convention, 1998, which provides for prior informed consent

regarding the importation of hazardous chemicals

• The Stockholm Convention, 2004, on persistent organic pollutants.

These main relevant international agreements should be considered in relation to the

National Waste Management System (NWMS) and are summarised below.

The Basel Convention, adopted in 1989, has the greatest bearing on the NEMA:Waste

Act. It addresses the trans-boundary movement of hazardous wastes and their disposal,

setting out categorization of hazardous waste and policies between member countries. The

Department of Environmental Affairs is considering accession to the amendments to the

Basel Convention that puts a ban on import and export of hazardous waste materials. The

DEA is developing a policy on imports and exports of waste and is in cooperation with the

Department of Trade and Industry jointly addressing the import and export control aspects

of the Basel Convention, together with the chemical Rotterdam and Stockholm conventions.

Annex I to the Basel Convention provides a list of hazardous waste substances that meet

the criteria of being explosive, flammable, toxic, or corrosive. The convention applies to any

waste that is defined as “hazardous” by any country through which the waste travels, or is

imported or exported from. By implication, the convention does apply to any waste

identified in the South African national legislation as “hazardous”.

The Basel Convention provides for the import and export of hazardous waste on the basis of

informed consent and stringent tracking of all movements of hazardous waste across


13

countries. The department is embarking on a process of developing a national policy on

import and export of wastes and near end of life goods. This policy / regulation will assist in

further controlling wastes coming into and out of the country.

The Montreal Protocol protects the ozone layer by phasing out the production of several

substances that contribute to ozone depletion, with the aim of ozone layer recovery by

2050. The protocol is designed to protect the Ozone layer by progressively phasing out the

use of a variety of gases (CFCs and HCFCs) that have been found to have the potential to

deplete the ozone layer in the atmosphere. In terms of the Waste Act, ‘priority wastes’ are

substances that require specific waste management measures due to the threat they pose

to health and the environment. It is on this basis, that the likelihood for some chemicals

listed under the treaty, are declared as ‘priority waste’ in South Africa.

The Department of Environmental Affairs is in the process of publishing the National

Implementation Plan for the Montreal Protocol. The plan includes the development on an

Ozone Depletion Substance (ODS) strategy and regulations will provide for the phasing out

of specified substances and their safe disposal.

The Rotterdam Convention sets out shared responsibilities in relation to importation of

hazardous chemicals and defines a Prior Informed Consent (PIC) procedure that specifies

standards for labelling and documentation of banned or severely restricted chemicals that

must be adhered to during their import and export. It also provides a criteria for a

notification process by which countries can add to the list of chemicals to which the PIC

procedure will apply in their jurisdiction.

The provisions of the Waste Act for regulation in relation to the import and export of priority

wastes clearly provide a potential mechanism for the implementation of the Rotterdam Act,

as do the provisions for extended producer responsibility. Over and above this, the

convention clearly specifies that each signatory country must designate a national authority

responsible for preventing or regulating the import and export of hazardous chemicals,

including maintaining a national database of such chemicals.

The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), which entered into

force in 2004, requires that member countries phase out POPs and prevent their import or

export. The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) deals with a

category of chemical compounds that harmfully accumulate in the food chain (bio-

accumulation) and as a result damage the integrity of ecological systems. It does not deal

specifically and only with waste. However, it is likely that the Waste Act may be used to

declare chemicals controlled under the convention as ‘priority wastes’ for better control

including phasing out.

Signatories to the Convention are required to undertake the following responsibilities: i)

Develop and implement appropriate strategies, ii) Identify stockpiles, products and articles

in use that contain or are contaminated with POPs; iii) Manage stockpiles and wastes in an

environmentally sound manner; iv) Dispose of waste in a way that destroys or irreversibly

transforms POPs content; v) Prohibit recycling, recovery, reclamation, direct re-use or

alternative use of POPs; and vi) Endeavour to develop strategies to identify contaminated


14

sites and perform eventual remediation in an environmentally sound manner. A National

South African Implementation Plan has been developed and will be reviewed in light of the

NEMWA.

3.4 Performance monitoring

The link between waste management and national performance targets is crucial as it

provides a yardstick to measure progress and identify possible challenges with regard to

waste. As such, the Presidency has developed a system to monitor government

departments’ perfomance in rendering services to the citizens.

Waste management is directly linked to Outcome 10 of the Presidential Delivery Agreement

i.e. Environmental assets and natural resources are well protected and continually

enhanced. Based on this performance system and its targets, waste management

contributes to two of the outputs under Outcome 10, namely:

• Output 2: Reduced greenhouse gas emissions, climate change and improved air

quality; as waste minimisation, diversion of waste from landfill, composting and

reduced resource consumption will help to reduce CO2 emissions

• Output 3: Sustainable Environmental Management, as less and better managed

waste is a key component of sustainable environmental management. Particular

emphasis is placed on reduction of waste disposal to landfill sites, and a number of

unlicensed waste disposal facilities.

Apart from Outcome 10, which is key in driving performance monitoring and set clear direct

outcomes for waste management, any actions taken to meet the requirements of this

outcome will also indirectly support: Outcome 4: Decent Employment through Inclusive

Economic Growth; and Outcome 8: Sustainable Human Settlements and Improved Quality of

Household Life.

It evident from the outcomes set out in the Presidential Delivery Agreement that waste

management is an essential sector, critical in meeting national economic and social

development objectives.

4 The socio-economic contribution of South Africa’s waste

management system

Over the past recent years, South Africa has strived towards an improved, equitable and

sustainable waste management regime. With good legislation in place, clarity in functioninal

roles and responsiblities, international lessons and commitments, and sufficient technical

capacity and human capital, the South African approach demontrates the country’s drive

towards an efficient world class system for waste management.

A number of opportunities for continous improvements exist within the enabling legal

framework and institutional arrangements on waste management. Emphasis for future

improvements is placed on key system elements that can triggers higher efficiency in the

waste service sector. These include:


15

• Service level agreements and contracting of services amongst key role players in

government. In instances where spheres of government (e.g. district and local

municipalities) share responsibilities, a clear contracting framework is required. This

contractual arrangement must ensure that a single authority remains politically and

administratively accountable for the service

• Regionalisation of service delivery: The trend towards greater decentralisation has a

potential to complicate the waste management system. A new emphasis on

regionalisation means better efficiency and transparency of service. This will ensure

that resource mobilisation is maximised. An obstacle to regionalisation is funding of

services. This is because according the Municipal System Act, when two local

municipalities perform the same function, that same function becomes elevated to

the district. On the other hand, the Municipal Infrastructure Grant (MIG) funds are

no longer allocated to the districts. As a result, funding of such functions by the

districts poses a challenge

• Ring-fencing of solid waste finances: A system where all revenue collected from

waste management service provision is ring-fenced towards improving the same

service is desirable within government institutions. Such a system for South Africa

will result in improved financial management, re-investment into waste facilities and

infrastructure, improved financial accountability and fair waste management service

delivery.

South Africa remains in the forefront on environmental protection amongst developing

countries and is committed to implement a world class system that will improve waste

management in the country. This takes stalk of the fact that government is, in some

instances, in competition with the private sector companies in rendering waste management

service.

4.1 Employment creation

Despite the positive economic projectory of South Africa, unemployment remains rife

amongst skilled and unskilled people. This has led to government encouraging all sectors to

quantify potential employment opportunities that can be created whilst rendering services.

Given the nature of the waste sector, there are hidden opportunities that needs to be

unclocked, in order for this sector to contribute significantly to job creation.

The economic contribution of the waste management sector can be assessed from the

premise of invested capital injected by government and other sectors in the delivery of

waste services. To this end, it is estimated that the total annual expenditure on solid waste

management in South Africa is approximately R10 billion per annum. An approximation is

that about 70% of this expenditure is through the public sector, largely local government,

while 30% is private sector expenditure (StatsSA, 2007). However, some components of the

sector may not be accurately accounted for in these figures, such as e.g. industrial and

manufacturing waste components. Figure 2 provides an estimate employment creation of

113,505 by the total waste sector:


16

Figure 2: Waste sector employment estimates (DEA, 2009e)

The National Treasury has identified municipal solid waste management as one of the areas

of municipal functioning with the greatest potential for job creation, particularly with respect

to unskilled or semi-skilled labour (National Treasury, 2008). It is clear from figure 2 that

within the waste management sector in general, labor intensive waste collection for

recycling purposes has a great potential of creating more employment opportunities,

followed by the public and private sector respectively. Therefore current efforts by

government to encourage recycling will be intensified. Table 2 provides the employment

trends in waste management departments in municipalitries between the 2005 and 2006

financial years.

2005 2006

Category Total

positions Positions

filled % positions

vacant Total

positions Positions

filled % positions

vacant

Metros 11,073 9,454 14.6 10,491 8,708 17

Category B and C

13,514 12,106 10.4 13,439 11,797 12.2

Total 24,587 21,560 12 23,930 20,505 14

Table 2. Employment within municipal waste management departments (National Treasury, 2008)

Within the public sector waste management, municipalities are generally expected to have

created increasing employment opportunities. This is due to the mandatory legislative

responsibility to provide for cleansing, general waste collection and disposal. However, there

appears to be a decline in the number of available employment opportunities (posts) in

refuse removal services within waste departments in municipalities. In instances where such

opportunities exist, there is a sizeable number of vacancies in municipalities (12-14%). It is

evident from table 2 that metropolitan municipalities have experienced the highest vacancy

rates at 15-17% (National Treasury, 2008).

Waste Secto r Emplo yment Est imates

Public, 20,505

Private (guesstimate),

9,000

Recycling, 84,000


17

4.2 Muncipal revenue

The waste management service function within municipailities contributes significantly

towards municipal income and revenue due to the user-pay principle applied for waste

management. Municipal citizens become consumers and payers for these services. It can be

assumed that within the 2007/08 financial year, municipalities received a total income of

R6.5 billion for solid waste, of which refuse removal charges accounted for around R3.5

billion, see table 3 (StatsSA, 2009). This demonstrate a financial input into municipal budget

income streams from waste management services of around 6% of total municipal

revenues, and around 3% from refuse removal charges alone.

According to StatsSA’s non-financial census of municipalities, there has been an 8% increase

in revenue collected from refuse removal charges in South African municipalities between

2007 and 2008 (StatsSA, 2009).

2007 2008

Income R million % contribution R million % contribution

Refuse removal charges 3,225 2.9 3,476 2.7

Sewerage and sanitation charges 4,474 4.1 4,875 3.8

Property rates received 18,331 16.6 20,956 16.4

Grants and subsidies received 29,244 26.6 35,535 27.8

Water sales 11,595 10.5 12,562 9.8

Electricity and gas sales 25,589 23.2 27,880 21.8

Other income 17,666 16.0 22,347 17.5

Total income 110,123 100 127,630 100

Table 3. Financial census of municipalities (StatsSA, 2009)

4.3 Capital investment in the waste sector

Capital investment into the waste sector is important in order to enhance and sustain waste

services. For now, there is no full cost accounting meausures in place to justify investment

in the input costs of the waste services, e.g. the return on investment, the quality

improvement of the service, or the accuracy of what the service actually costs.

Table 4 provide example estimation of capital investments in the waste sector that may

assist in providing a perspective of the capital expenditure required to continue providing

the capital base required. It can be seen that permitted landfill sites in average cost R50

mill, permitting un-permitted landfill sites around R30 mill, and hazardous waste disposal

sites around R200 mill.

Indicator Value (where available)

Estimated value of permitted landfill sites 500 sites @ R50 million/site = R25 billion

Estimated cost of permitting un-permitted landfill sites 1 500 sites @ R20 million/site = R30 billion

Estimated value of hazardous waste disposal sites 30 sites @ R200 million/site = R6 billion


18

Table 4 Estimates of capital investment in the waste sector (Goldblatt, 2009)

Table 5 provides example approved costs for waste management services for improved

waste management services in municipalities in 2006-08. Research and investigations into

the costs of landfills and vehicles suggests that these costs vary significantly from

municipality to municipality, and are strongly influenced by contextual local factors.

Generating average cost therefore proves difficult (Goldblatt, 2009).

Type of capital

investment Municipality

Estimated

cost/budget (R) Year

New landfill (to replace

three existing landfills) City of Cape Town (metro) 433 million 2008/09

Investigate and develop new

general landfill Emfuleni LM (Category B1 municipality) 895,000 2006/07

New landfill Mbombela LM (Category B1 municipality) 732,462 2005/06

Compactor Truck Umhlathuze (Category B1 municipality) 1.4 million 2006/07

Compactor Truck Thaba Chweu Municipality (Category B3

municipality) 760,000 2006/07

Table 5: Cost estimates for capital investments in solid waste (Goldblatt, 2009)

5 Waste generation and trends in South Africa

Waste is typically divided into two classes based on the risk the waste poses, namely

general and hazardous waste.

• General (or municipal) solid waste is defined as "waste that does not pose an

immediate hazard or threat to health or to the environment, and includes domestic

waste, building and demolition waste, business waste and inert waste. (Waste Act,

2008). The Act further defined domestic waste as meaning “waste, excluding

hazardous waste, that emanates from premises that are used wholly or mainly for

residential, educational, health care, sport or recreation purposes”

• Hazardous waste is defined as “any waste that contains organic or inorganic

elements or compounds that may, owing to the inherent physical, chemical or

toxicological characteristics of that waste, have a detrimental impact on health and

the environment” (Waste Act, 2008).

In this section, status is made on generation rates, status, trends and risks for these two

classes of waste.


19

5.1 General waste

5.1.1 Municipal solid waste

General municipal waste is not the largest waste category by volume in South Africa (the

largest waste category is industrial and mining waste), but it is the most significant in terms

of public financing and the impact that it has on the day-to-day lives of ordinary citizens

(DEA, 2009a).

Municipal solid waste constitute a large percentage of the total waste generated in urban

and rural areas. Municipalities are the key players in dealing with general non-hazardous

waste. A total of 239 municipalities performed solid waste management functions in 2009,

up from 226 in 2005, servicing in 2009 around 8,4 mill households, or 64,5 % of all

households. The data since 2005 suggests that solid waste functions are increasingly being

assigned to local municipalities, also in predominantly rural areas.

2006/

07

2007/

08

2008/

09

2009/10 2010/1

1

2011/1

2

2012/1

3

% average annual

growth

R Million Outcome Preliminary

estimates

Medium-term estimates 2006/07

-

2009/10

2009/10

-

2012/13

Metros 1280 2465 2965 2841 4909 5343 5794 30.4% 26.8%

Local

municipalities

673 731 1268 2256 3050 2895 3064 49.6% 10.7%

Secondary

cities

476 506 737 1115 1540 1396 1522 33.6% 10.9%

Large Towns 142 142 311 444 640 655 644 46.0% 13.3%

Small Towns 50 57 130 581 653 628 662 126.7% 4.4%

Mostly rural 14 25 90 116 217 217 235 104.0% 26.6%

Districts 8 11 9 34 37 37 35 65.3% 0.9%

Total 1960 3206 4243 5131 7996 8275 8893 37.8% 20.1%

Table 6: Operating revenue for solid waste function by category municipality, 2006/7-2012/12 (National

Treasury, 2011)

There is a clear indication that municipalities’ revenue income from solid waste services has

been growing rapidly in the last decade, see table 6. Some of this growth can be attributed

to more complete reporting of this category of revenue as municipalities move towards

identifying the streams of revenue associated with their respective services. Metros revenue

related to solid waste services is budgeted to grow by 27 % over the next decade.

South Africa has experienced rapid growth in waste volumes, associated with a prolonged

period of economic growth. About 42 million cubic metres of general waste required

collection and disposal in 1997. During the next 11 years, general waste generation rose to

nearly 67 million cubic metres, or by 62.5%. This represents an annual average growth rate


20

of 4.8%, with higher growth rates projected for the Free State and Mpumalanga, as per the

table 7. Concurrently there has been a growing financial resource allocation to waste

services, which can be attributed to growth in demand for service due to urban population

growth, urban expansion and increased economic activity.

Province

1997 2010 Growth

m3

% of

total m3

% of

total Total %

Annual

Average %

Eastern Cape 2 281 000 5.4% 3 105 989 4.5% 36.2% 2.8%

Free state 1 674 000 4.0% 3 877 380 5.6% 131.6% 10.1%

Gauteng 17 899 000 42.4% 26 085 304 38.0% 45.7% 3.5%

KwaZulu-Natal 4 174 000 9.9% 5 749 959 8.4% 37.8% 2.9%

Mpumalanga 3 831 000 9.1% 11 200 387 16.3% 192.4% 14.8%

Northern Cape 733 000 1.7% 956 369 1.4% 30.5% 2.3%

Northern

Province 1 470 000 3.5% 2 374 864 3.5% 61.6% 4.7%

North West 1 625 000 3.8% 2 296 489 3.3% 41.3% 3.2%

Western Cape 8 543 000 20.2% 12 979 785 18.9% 51.9% 4.0%

Total 42 230 000 100.0% 68 626 526 100.0% 62.5% 4.8%

Table 7: Estimated general waste generation by province, 1997 and 2010 (DWAF, 2001 and G Purnell, 2009)

The best available data on domestic and commercial waste generated is reflected by the

waste disposed of to landfills accepting such wastes (Purnell, 2009). Data assessment of

estimated general waste disposed to municipal landfill sites across the country in 2006/07 is

reflected in table 8.

Municipality Category Number Average waste disposed (tons / annum)

Total waste disposed (tons / annum)

A Metropolitan municipalities 6 2 419 000 14 514 400

B1 Municipalities with the largest budgets 21 155 684 3 269 364

B2 Municipal with larger populations and towns

29 65 410 1 896 890

B3 Municipalities with relatively small population

111 29 478 3 272 058

B4 Municipalities which are mainly rural 70 16 607 1 162 490

Total General Waste Disposed (2006/7) 24 115 402

Table 8 : Estimated general waste disposed of at “general” landfills 2006/7 (DEAT, 2007)


21

The estimated total of 24,1 million tons per annum for 2006/7 compares with the estimate

of 20 million tons per annum for 2006 presented in “A Strategic Framework for Sustainable

Development in South Africa (DEAT, 2006 as quoted by Purnell, 2009). As standards of

living increase, it is to be expected that waste generation rates increase. However,

improving service levels in many municipalities may also result in increased collection

quantities. Demographics, socio-economic conditions and land uses are of particular

importance, as the community wealth level directly influences the type and amount of waste

generated (Purnell, 2009).

Municipality Category Access to Service %

A Metropolitan municipalities 80%

B1 Municipalities with the largest budgets 61%

B2 Municipal with larger populations and towns 60%

B3 Municipalities with relatively small population 55%

B4 Municipalities which are mainly rural 20%

Table 9: Percentage of households receiving a basic level of service (DEAT, 2007)

Table 9 provide DEAT figures in 2007 for how many households in South Africa received

basic levels of waste management services. These figures corresponds reasonable well to

StatsSA figures for households receiving waste services in the period 2005-07, see table 10.

The number of served consumer units has risen at almost 10% per year since 2005, with

8,06 million households served. Access to services is greatest in metro areas (92.5%) and

small towns (73.5%), while it is lowest in rural municipalities (16%). Access levels are

lowest in Limpopo (25.5%), followed by the Eastern Cape (46.6%) and Mpumalanga

(46.7%). It is further reported that 64.5% of South African households had access to some

form of solid waste management service in 2007.

Category Total h’holds

(2007)

Consumers receiving services % of all

h’holds (2007) 2005 2006 2007

Metro's 4 714 022 3 421 122 4 029 732 4 358 630 92.5%

Secondary Cities 2 207 003 1 232 347 1 253 940 1 389 260 62.9%

Large towns 1 095 456 564 322 587 670 628 276 57.4%

Small Towns 1 637 412 983 981 1 066 597 1 204 108 73.5%

Largely Rural 2 824 259 493 226 413 560 453 061 16.0%

Districts* 22 482 6 357 28 906 29 531

TOTAL 12 500 634 6 701 355 7 380 405 8 062 866 64.5%

Table 10: Access to waste management services (Stats SA 2007 and 2008 – as quoted by Purnell, 2009)

The majority of domestic waste is collected by municipal services and transported either

directly, or via a transfer station, to disposal. Collection services include the use of purpose

compactor equipped vehicles, tractors, trailers, small trucks or utility vehicles. In many

informal areas collection may be by hand to a centrally placed skip, which is uplifted

regularly, or when full (Purnell, 2009). As summarised in table 10 and 11, percentage access


22

to services has a direct correlation to the amount of waste collected, and ultimately disposed

to the landfill sites.

Municipality Category Number of municipalities

Average waste collected (t/y)

Total waste collected (t/y)

A Metropolitan municipalities 6 1 752 613 10 515 678

B1 Municipalities with the largest budgets

21 247 743 5 202 603

B2 Municipal with larger populations and towns

29 129 351 3 751 179

B3 Municipalities with relatively small population

111 16 041 1 780 551

B4 Municipalities which are mainly rural

70 98 6 860

Total General Waste Collected (2006/7) 21 256 871

Table 11: Estimate of waste collected by Municipalities (2006/7)(DEAT, 2007)

As seen in the tables 10 and 11, the accounted figure of 21,3 million tons per year of

general waste collected during 2006/7, is less than the total general waste disposed (24,1

million tons per year) due to private contractors (mostly business) collecting waste and

transporting it to the disposal facilities.

Less than

weekly

Commu

nal refuse

dump

Own refuse

dump

No rubbish

disposal Other TOTAL

% of total

h’holds

Total

Households

Metro's 81 558 113 496 255 026 133 474 17 861 601 415 12.8% 4 714 022

Secondary Cities 30 313 54 398 512 993 113 776 3 448 714 928 32.4%

2 207 003

Large

towns 22 316 23 665 70 639 4 662 121 282 11.1%

1 095 456

Small Towns 41 947 39 372 124 337 4 418 210 074 12.8%

1 637 412

Largely

Rural 449 004 9 130 458 134 16.2%

284 259

Districts 1 379 141 1 520 6.8% 22 482

Total 176 134 230 931 768 019 892 609 39 660 2 107 353 16.9% 1 250 0634

Table 12: Consumers with inadequate access to services by municipal context (Community Survey, 2007, as

quoted and adjusted by Purnell, 2009 and National Traesury, 2011)

Table 12 indicate that more than 1,4 million households in large cities (metro’s, secondary

cities, large towns) currently receive below basic levels of service. This amounts to 56% of


23

the total number of households (Community Survey, 2007). The inability of municipalities to

service e.g. informal settlements and other under-serviced areas result in uncontrolled and

unsafe waste disposal activities. Therefore waste management services for informal

settlements, particulary within the metropolitan municipal areas, lead to illegal disposal and

threatens the environment and/or the health of the people living in these areas. In most

informal settlement where services are inadequate, there is a high manifestation of rodent

populations, which normally carries communicable diseases.

The finalisation of the Policy on Free Basic Refuse Removal Services for Indigents

communities has brought some relief to those who cannot afford to pay for the basic

services. Some municipalities have already begun implementation of measures outlined in

the policy, like free basic refuse service subsidies, in order to accommodate the poor. Table

13 provides the percentage of households receiving Free Basic Service. Adoption and

implementation rates are lowest in largely rural municipalities.

% consumers receiving FBS

% with policy

%

implementing FBS 2005 2006 2007

Metro's 70.8% 54.9% 41.2% 100.0% 100.0%

Secondary Cities 33.8% 30.8% 25.2% 100.0% 100.0%

Large towns 25.4% 26.4% 33.2% 93.1% 82.8%

Small Towns 32.4% 47.6% 53.6% 90.9% 89.1%

Largely Rural 43.4% 43.1% 44.3% 71.4% 58.7%

Districts 25.4% 63.9% 76.9% 91.7% 66.7%

TOTAL 52.5% 46.8% 39.9% 87.4% 80.8%

Table 13: Coverage of Free Basic Refuse (Services: StatsSA, 2007)

5.1.2 Building and Demolition waste

Construction and demolition wastes is defined as non-hazardous waste resulting from the

construction, remodelling, repair or renovation and demolition of built structures or physical

infrastructure. These wastes include concrete, bricks, masonry, ceramics, metals, plastic,

paper, cardboard, gypsum drywall, timber, insulation, asphalt, glass, carpeting, roofing, site

clearance and sweepings, and excavation materials.

There is limited published information on the composition and amount of construction and

demolition waste in South Africa. However, observations indicate that construction and

demolition sites generate substantial commingled wastes (mixtures of concrete, masonry,

ceramics, metals etc) from building sites (ie. little or no separation of material types);

asphalt, concrete and excavated materials from road construction, maintenance and

rehabilitation; and site clearance and excavation waste from “greenfield” developments

(Purnell, 2009).

5.1.3 Tyres

In an assessment of the ‘National Waste Quantification and Waste Information System’, one

of the waste streams assessed was waste tyres (Purnell, 2009). The findings indicates that


24

the total mass of new pneumatic tyres entering the South African market is approximately

175 00 tons per year. Once used this mass is reduced to approximately 150 000 tons per

year, a yearly amount that requires recycling, treatment or disposal.

There are limited avenues to legally dispose of waste tyres. Disposal at landfill sites is

problematic due to the physical properties of tyres. Many landfills do not accept waste tyres,

while some charge a higher rate for tyre disposal. Tyres are often burnt in open fields,

causing health hazards due to smoke and residuals in soil.

Tyre recycling currently is limited to one recycling plant in Cape Town producing rubber

crumb, and approximately 11 other smaller recycling operators who produce cut, stamped

and punched items, like sandals, mats, etc., but this is limited as they can only use waste

tyres that do not contain steel belts. Some waste tyre collectors are accumulating stockpiles

of waste tyres.

This means that vast numbers of waste tyres are being disposed of illegally. The majority

are illegally dumped, while some are “refurbished” by repairing or re-grooving tyres for sale

as part-worn tyres. Illegal burning of waste tyres is also common in winter or in remote

open fields, with no easy access. This imposes serious atmospheric impact, particularly in

areas declared as air quality priority areas according to the NEMA: Air Quality Act.

The Department of Environment Affairs has developed the Waste Tyre Regulation, which

came into effect in 2009 (the Waste Tyre Regulations, 2009, Government Gazette No

R9032). Since its promulgation, tyre dealers in South Africa had to sort all used tyres into:

Retreadable casings; part worn tyres (complying with Road Regulations); and the balance as

waste tyres (all passenger and light commercial waste tyres must be rendered unusable).

Waste tyres may only be disposed of to end users for recycling, or to landfill.

5.1.4 Industrial packaging

According to the study conducted by Responsible Packaging Association of Southern Africa

on Industrial Packaging in South Africa (RRPMASA) (Purnell, 2009), the following 32

manufacturers manifacturing industrial packs or containers were identified:

• Steel drums (open-end and tight head), 200, 210 and 230ℓ - 5 manufacturers

• Plastic drums, PE-HD (open end and tight head), 220 and 235ℓ - 4 manufacturers

• Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBC), PE-HD, 1000ℓ as well as 1000ℓ roto-moulded

flow bins, - 2 manufacturers

• Plastic drums, PE-HD, 20 and 25ℓ - 13 manufacturers

• Steel drums, 20 and 25ℓ - 3 manufacturers

• Plastic and steel containers, odd sizes between 25ℓ and 210ℓ - 5 manufacturers.

There is presently an immerging industry re-conditioning and reprocessing industrial

packaging for re-use. Reconditioning processes vary from rinsing, inspection and dispatch


25

for re-use, through to rinsing, pressure testing, and furnaces and coating facilities. Some of

these processes are obviously capital intensive. The reconditioning processes followed are

also different for plastic and steel containers. There are 27 reconditioning and reprocessing

entities listed on the RRPMASA database. The number of containers locally manufactured,

reconditioned and recycled in 2008 is provided in table 14 below.

Steel

manufactured

Steel

Reconditioned

%

Reconditioned

Plastic

manufactured

Plastic

reconditioned

%

Reconditioned

Plastic

recycled

% recycled

% Recovered

20 & 25 litre N/A 14 000 N/A 9 933260 74 442 0.75% 823 235 8.29% 9.04%

>25 &<210

litre 1 189 000 8 036 0.68% 394 800 2 474 0.63% N/A N/A N/A

210 litre 2 029 600 950 920 46.85% 624 000 64 343 10.31% 810 0.13% 10.44

%

Intermediate

Bulk

Containers

- - - N/A 75 971 N/A 50 N/A N/A

Table 14: Locally Manufactured, Reconditioned and Recycled Industrial Containers (RPMASA, 2009) as quoted by

Purnell, 2009)

It is evident that a very small portion of containers are reconditioned or recycled. Of all

respondents in the mentioned survey, only three noted that they dispose of end-of-life

containers to landfill. However, a large number of industrial containers are disposed to

landfill by the users, or find secondary applications, both of concern due to the health and

environmental risk of residues in such containers.

5.2 Hazardous waste

Waste is hazardous according to whether it is flammable, reactive, corrosive or toxic and it

cannot be dumped into a landfill without any treatment. Hazardous waste is furthermore

graded from extreme to non-toxic in nature and this grading determines the appropriate

disposal techniques. Extreme hazardous waste, such as cyanide and mercury, needs to be

encapsulated, stored, treated and then destroyed. Hazardous waste is therefore classfied in

terms of a specific set of risks that they might pose to the natural environment, human

health and/or built environments, which include:

• Explosion or fire

• Infections, pathogens, parasites or their vectors

• Chemical instability, reactions or corrosions

• Carcinogens and mutagens

• Toxicity, including persistence in the food chain and ecological system.


26

Various types of hazardous waste can be identified, e.g. organic and inorganic chemicals,

oily wastes, putrescent animal or vegetable matter, high volume wastes with a low

concentration of hazardous substances such as heavy metals and oils. Hazardous wastes are

divided into four categories based on the level of risk, and these categories are indicative of

the type of landfill site at which they can be disposed, see table 15.

Classification Example Category of disposal site

HR 1: Extreme hazard Hg and PCBs HH

HR 2: High hazard Mn and Zn HH

HR 3: Moderate hazard Ni and phenol Hh

HR 4: Low hazard Ethanol Hh

Non-toxic/non-hazardous Domestic waste G

Table 15 Hazardous waste classification (DEA, 2009a)

Waste from the first two categories of risk (extreme and high) can only be disposed of at

landfill sites with an H:H rating, at which appropriate measures have been taken to mitigate

risk. Categories 3 and 4 (moderate to low) can be disposed of at landfills with either an H;H

rating, or a H:h rating.

In terms of implementing the waste hierarchy for industrial waste, the NEMWA emphasisis

waste avoidance and reduction due to the significant environmental impact of this waste,

and the potential harmful consequences for human health. Where hazardous wastes cannot

be avoided, emphasis is placed on regulation, not only in defining standards for treatment

and disposal, but also in ensuring reuse and recycling takes place in a safe and responsible

manner.

In as much as hazardous waste are regulated under separate legislation, certain classes of

hazardous waste are not regulated by the Waste Act. These include; radioactive waste,

which is regulated by the Hazardous Substances Act, 1973, the National Nuclear Regulator

Act, 1999, and the Nuclear Energy Act, 1999; residue deposits and stockpiles from mining,

which are regulated by the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002;

explosives, the disposal of which is regulated by the Explosives Act, 2003; and Animal

carcasses, the disposal of which is regulated by the Animal Health Act, 2002.

South Africa’s sole nuclear waste management site, Vaalputs in the Northern Cape, is to

house high-level waste within the next ten years, according to the Nuclear Energy

Corporation of South Africa (NECSA). The site only deals with low and intermediate level

waste from the Koeberg nuclear power station. The high-level waste is stored at

underground facilities at Pelindaba and Koeberg but South Africa needs a fully operational

high-level waste management site by 2070 to deal with spent fuel accumulated at Pelindaba

and Koeberg.

An overview of the status of hazardous waste in South Africa can be sourced from Provincial

Hazardous Waste Management Plans (HWMP). Table 16 provide an overview assessment of

hazardous waste generation and treatment as reported in provincial plans (IHWMP), also


27

showing that only three Provinces have completed Provincial Integrated Hazardous Waste

Management Plans, namely Western Cape in December 2006, Gauteng in September 2007,

and North West Province in October 2006 (DEA, 2007). It can e.g. be seen that in Gauteng

almost all hazardous waste generated is disposed to landfills, and that in Western Cape and

North West most hazardous waste generated is un-accounted for in relation to treatment or

landfilling. The data obtained for Gauteng reflect an increase from 232,000 tons in 1997 to

385,000 tons in 2006 in hazardous waste disposal to landfill. The figures for Western Cape

reflect a decrease from 131,000 tons per year in 1997 to 11,162 tons in 2006.

Province / Year

Hazardous Waste

Waste generated (t/a) Waste treated recycled

or other (t/a) Landfill (t/a)

Gauteng (2006) 446,200 48,000 385,000

Western Cape (2006) 55,810 11,162

North West (2005) +/- 20 0000 +/- 4 000

Table 16: Hazardous Waste Generation per Province (HWMP’s) (DEA, 2007)

In Gauteng, it was reported that a number of industries practise on-site treatment of

hazardous waste streams, prior to removal of disposal. However, this is mostly limited to

chemical treatment, mostly PH control for neutralisation of acid or alkali waste streams. In

most other cases where hazardous waste treatment occurs, it is generally removed and

performed by a waste management contractor before disposal to landfill as part of the

service. Other off-site hazardous waste treatments used in Gauteng were thermal processes,

chemical treatment and encapsulation. Only two hazardous waste treatment facilities were

identified, a thermal treatment facility in Olifantsfontein and a chemical treatment plant in

Germiston that treats and reclaims metals from effluents generated by the metal finishing

industry and precious metal refiners. A third treatment facility in Germiston was awaiting

licensing at the time of the Gauteng Integrated Hazardous Waste Management Plan (2007).

The Gauteng HWMP (2008) does not comment on the number of available hazardous waste

disposal facilities.

The Western Cape Hazardous Waste Hazardous Plan (2006) state that there were three

licensed hazardous landfills, with an estimated remaining lifespan between 7-13 years.

The North West Province Hazardous Waste Management Plan (2006) stated that hazardous

wastes were transported to the Holfontein hazardous landfill site in Gauteng, while delisted

wastes (hazardous wastes treated and permitted to be disposed of on suitable general

landfills) were transported to the Rosslyn and Reitfontein GLB landfills in Gauteng. Further,

specific hazardous wastes permitted by the authorities were being incinerated in the Holcim

Cement Kiln (Dudfield) and the PPC Cement Kiln at Dettoek in North West Province.


28

The general lack of adequate reliable hazardous waste information for the other six

provinces that have not completed HWMP’s make quantifying a mass balance for hazardous

wastes difficult. The 2007 data represent best current available information.

In 2007 DEAT furthermore undertook a survey of five waste management companies

handling hazardous wastes in the four provinces of Eastern Cape, Gauteng, KwaZuluNatal

and Western Cape. The survey found that a total amount of 710,000 tons of hazardous

waste was disposed of by these companies, of which 117,500 tons was organic.

It can be mentioned that the formal transportation of hazardous wastes mainly is

undertaken by commercial waste management companies to treatment facilities, recycling

or disposal. The transport of hazardous substances is governed by legislation. Transport

Emergency Cards (Tremcards) must be carried by drivers and must supplement Hazchem

information that must be displayed on the vehicle.

Below is provided status on a number of specific hazardous waste streams.

5.2.1 Healthcare Risk Waste

Health care risk waste (HCRW) is used to describe waste emanating from public and private

health care (HC) institutions. HCRW includes infectious materials, sharps, hazardous

chemicals, diagnostic drugs, human tissue, sharps and residues of a radioactive nature. Due

to its infectious and hazardous properties this waste poses a threat to human health.

Exposure could be caused through a variety of routes such as punctures, abrasions or cuts

in the skin, inhalation through mucous membranes and ingestion. All individuals exposed to

HCRW are potentially at risk, including those within health care institutions that generate

HCRW, waste contractors who collect, transport and manage this waste and those who are

exposed to it as a consequence of careless management and illegal disposal (DEA, 2008).

Over the years there has been several studies which have determined the treatment

capacity for HCRW. In 2007 DEA undertook a study to determine the volume of HCRW

generated in the country. The study concluded that approximately 42,000 tons of HCRW

was generated annually in South Africa, 55% of which was generated in public health care

facilities. The study also included an assessment of the available treatment capacity which

was approximately 31,390 tons per year (excluding incinerators operating without air-

emission control equipment). A further treatment capacity of 36,860 tons per year was

predicted to come on stream during 2008 (DEA, 2008). As treatment facilities close down

and start up on a regular basis, these studies, however, are not precise.

In order to provide reliable statistics on treatment capacity for planning purposes, DEA

therefore today keeps a database of facilities and their respective planned treatment

capacities which has been provided in their licence applications. The database is updated

with new facilities as they are licenced. In order to determine the actual HCRW treated,

facilities are required to provide monthly reports on the tonnages of waste treated in the

previous month. These figures are required in term of the waste licences issued to the

facilities and are required to be signed off by the Chief Executive Officer to ensure

accountability.


29

The DEA database holds 11 licenced treatment facilities in South Africa currently in

operation, see table 17. These 11 facilities have a combined treatment capacity of

approximately 4,800 tons per month assuming all facilities are operating at 80% capacity

providing an annual treatment capacity of approximately 57,600 tons. Noting that an annual

escalation in HCRW generation of 1.5% per annum has been applied to the generation

figures (based on the actual population growth rate of 1.06%) approximately 45,000 tons of

HCRW is generated annually (approximately 3,770 tons monthly). The current treatment

figures indicate a reserve treatment capacity of approximately 1,000 tons per month.

Province No. of

incinerators

Planned

incineration capacity tonnes/

month

No. of non-burn

facilities

Planned non-burn

capacity tonnes/ month

Eastern Cape 1 476

Free State 1 112

Gauteng 3 892 1 960

Kwazulu-Natal 2 992

North West 1 576

Western Cape 1 80 1 756

1,660 3,184

TOTAL MONTHLY CAPACITY 4,844

Table 17 HCRW treatment capacity per pronvince (DEA, 2008)

Although the figures indicate an excess in treatment capacity, the information received from

the facilities also indicate a high level of stoppage due to breakdowns, malfunctions and

planned and unplanned maintenance. Over the past 12 months the Department has found it

necessary to authorize the landfilling of substantial volumes of untreated HCRW due to

breakdowns at the treatment facilities. In order to better understand the capacity availability

of the treatment facilities, DEA has instituted a requirement for treatment facilities to report

on planned and unplanned stoppages which interrupts operations for more than 12

consecutive hours through an amendment to the facilities licence conditions. A national

enforcement strategy has also been implemented to improve compliance and a policy of

zero tolerance has been instituted with respect to transgressions within the sector.

Over the past eight years, a significant amount of work has been done by provincial and

national government towards achieving this objective. This work includes the assessment of

the feasibility of adopting a regional approach to the management of HCRW, the piloting of

HCRW segregation systems in an urban and rural environment, developing a national policy

and regulation on HCRW management, developing training courses for health care

professionals and monitoring the generation and capacity for the management of this waste

stream.

Additional work is currently underway, which will see HCRW regulation promulgated, a

review of the licenses of existing treatment facilities, development of a plan to roll out the


30

segregation system for consideration by Cabinet, updating of the training program,

development of a database to record bed numbers and development of national tender

specifications for installation of the segregation infrastructure as well as the contracting out

of the HCRW management function for public hospitals.

5.2.2 Pesticides

A steady and consistent use of fertilizers for enhancing agricultural production by most

farmers in South Africa has been reported. In some cases, little or no biological pest control

methods are favoured, and as a result, pesticides is used exclusively to deal with pest.

Pesticides include herbicides, insecticides, fungicides, seed treatments and plant growth

regulators. The total market for agricultural pesticides in 2008 was approximately 49,970

tons. This represents the total amount of product, not the total amount of the active

ingredients (DEA, 2009a). The use of pesticides involves a number of environmnemtal and

helath concers, including obsolete or expired pesticides, normally stored on farms,

distributors, warehouses, and the unsafe storage and or disposal of these obsolete

pesticides. Cases of pesticides containers, with no labels, being used for storage of foodstuff

and water, particularly in poor communities, have been reported.

South Africa and six other African countries form part of Project 1 of the Africa Stockpiles

Programme (ASP), designed to address the accumulation of obsolete pesticide stockpiles in

Africa. As very little was known on the extent of the problem in South Africa, a pilot project

was launched to locate and collect obsolete pesticides in Limpopo province. As much as 80

tons of obsolete pesticides were collected in the province, leading to estimates of

approximately 700 tons being stockpiled throughout South Africa (DEA, 2009a).

Initiatives for collection and environmentally sound disposal of obsolete pesticides have

been embarked upon in the past but there have been recurrence of these waste streams. As

agricultural activities continue, there is a need for a sustainable solution for sound

management of this waste stream. Following the recent implementation of the Africa

Stockpiles Programme, the pesticides industry has submitted a draft Pesticides Industry

Waste Management Plan that proposes options for sustainable environmentally sound

management of pesticides wastes and their residues.

5.2.3 eWaste

Electronic Waste (e-waste) is a relatively new, but rapidly growing, hazardous waste.

Electrical and electronic waste, which includes white goods, consumer electronics, and IT is

classified as a hazardous waste, and is a growing global concern. Many developed countries

have taken steps to develop policy guidelines and legislation for developing e-waste

management systems (DEA, 2008).

In South Africa most of the e-waste processing is done by the private sector, which

responded to the profit potential in recycling discarded technology. For instance, scrap metal

recycling, including white goods such as fridges and washing machines, had been

undertaken for some time, as has the refurbishment of PCs for use in social projects,

including in schools or in disadvantaged communities. At the same time, printer cartridges

have been recycled, and ad hoc take-back schemes implemented. However, most of these

initiatives have been fragmented (eWASA, 2008).


31

DEA through the NEM:Waste Act has requested some industries, among others the Lighting

Industry to submit Industry Waste Management Plans (IWMP). These plans shall outline

measures to be taken to minimise and manage waste emanating from this sector in an

environmentally sound manner. For instance, the Information Technology Association has

recently and voluntarily submitted its draft IWMP to the DEA for review and approval.

With the information age, eWaste will continue to grow exponentially, and rapidly become a

major waste challenge. Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) can contain over

one thousand different substances, many of which are toxic and some that have a high

market value when extracted. In terms of implementing the waste hierarchy, the main

challenge lies in separating eWaste from general waste to facilitate safe and economically

sustainable recycling of this waste stream. Informal, private sector based, recycling of

eWaste is relatively prevalent, but often done without safety equipment, resulting in

potential harm to health, and contamination of the recycling site, as well as the release of

noxious fumes through the burning of plastic to access the valuable metals inside the

equipment. Formal recycling is typically a partially mechanized process, which separates

materials, whilst WEEE is often dismantled by hand and then separated before shredding.

Some mechanized processes do not necessarily allow for re-use or refurbishment, as the

whole object is put through a shredder, and the shredded output is then mechanically

separated using water, air or magnetism. The separated shredded plastics and metals are

then sent for reprocessing as recyclates (eWASA, 2008).

5.2.4 Mining waste

Section 4(1)(b) of the NEMWA specifically excludes mining residue deposits and stockpiles

from the scope of the Act, in as much as these are regulated in terms of the Mineral and

Petroleum Resources Development Act, 2002, (MPRDA). The regulatory framework for

mining residue stockpiles and deposits is under review, and in terms of the amendment to

the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, responsibility for the performance of

environmental authorisations will revert to DEA.

South Africa produce around 450 million tonnes of waste annually, of which 70% is

generated by the mining industry. Gold mines on the Witwatersrand Basin alone produce

105 million tonnes per annum (23% of the total) with about 200,000 tonnes of waste

generated for every tonne of gold produced. Much of this waste is deposited into tailings

dams, of which there are more than 270 on the Witwatersrand Basin, covering some 400

km2. These dams are all unlined and many are unvegetated, and can be a source of

extensive dust, as well as soil and water pollution (DEA, 2009a).

The production of mining waste on such a large-scale waste has serious consequences for

the environment. It causes dysfunctional hydrology, as well as acidification and salinisation

of soils, groundwater and surface water bodies, resulting in breakdowns in nutrient cycling

and environmental degradation. This can lead to losses in biodiversity and ecosystem

services, and, therefore, both tailings and contaminated water can be expected to eventually

contribute to negative health impacts in humans if mitigation measures are not put in place.

Environmental planning of waste disposal by the South African gold mining industry in the

past, although legal at the time, has since been proven to be environmentally unsound.


32

Among common practice was the location of unlined tailings dams on natural pans,

wetlands, water courses and catchment areas, and the disposal of mine process water into

pans and unlined evaporation dams. Consequently, there have been a number of negative

environmental impacts as a result of this practice.

5.2.5 Metallurgical waste

The scrap metal recycling industry is well developed, with nearly 100 scrap metal dealers

belonging to the Metal Recyclers Association of South Africa, who process over 80% of all

scrap metal for beneficiation by the downstream industry. The World Steel Association

estimated that SA collected a total of 3,7 million tons of scrap (ferrous and non-ferrous) in

2007 (DEA, 2009).

The industry is typified by:

• Peddlars – individuals who collect or purchase scrap for re-sale to bucket shops,

scrap merchants or scrap processors

• Bucket Shops – typically 2-4 employees who buy scrap from peddlers and

transport small quantities using a bakkie, for resale

• Scrap Merchants – purchase scrap and perform basic sorting into metal types, then

sell to scrap processors

• Scrap Processors – handle large volumes of scrap and sort and process them for

beneficiation by local foundries, steel mills or export.

The total South African crude steel production in 2008 amounted to 8,176 million tons.

Carbon steel deliveries by the primary steel industry were 6,535 million tons, of which 5,415

million tons was sold on the local market and 1,120 million tons was exported

(www.saisi.co.za). While recent total recycling figures are not available, it was in 2005

reported that approximately 2,3 million tons of scrap were collected and recycled (of which

approximately 0,39 million tons was exported). In 2006 approximately 2,58 million tons of

scrap was collected and recycled (again approximately 0,4 million tons was exported). It has

further been reported that report that the mass of ferrous scrap exported in 2008 was 1,270

million tons (DEA, 2009a).

The value of scrap ferrous metals is reportedly very sensitive to demand, which in turn is

dependant on general economic activity and development. Hence, the amount of scrap

metals delivered to recyclers vary widely.

5.2.6 Commercial wastes

It is estimated that over 50 million batteries are consumed annually in South Africa. The

vast majority of these are non-rechargeable “ordinary” batteries that are used once and

discarded into the domestic waste stream. This equate to approximately 2,500 tons of

batteries disposed to landfills per year (DEA, 2009a).

Commonly used batteries include:

• Alkaline batteries – these batteries used to contain mercury, but these has been

phased out and are now generally alkaline manganese batteries. Although these


33

can be disposed of in domestic waste, they can be recycled to recover steel and

zinc, but is not actively done in the world yet

• Rechargeable batteries – these consist of nickel-cadmium (Ni-Cd) batteries, and

the now more common nickel metal hydride (NiMH) batteries. NiCd batteries

contain cadmium, hence are considered hazardous waste when disposed. Both

types are recyclable for the recovery of nickel, iron, zinc and cadmium

• Lithium-ion batteries – these high performance rechargeable batteries are typically

found in mobile phones and other specialised consumer electronics. These are

recyclable to recover valuable metals

• Silver oxide batteries – these are small non rechargeable “button” shaped batteries

used in hearing aids, wristwatches etc. These may contain mercury, so are

considered hazardous when disposing.

There are initiatives to recycle used batteries in some parts of the country, but these

appears to be ad hoc. Recycling bins are e.g. being placed at large retail outlets. The

recyclers are expected to collect the bins and sort them at a designated plant. Recyclable

rechargeable batteries are containerised and sent to their recycling plant outside the

country, while non-recyclable batteries are to be concrete encased and disposed to landfill

(www.uniross.co.za).

Fluorescent lamps have a high mercury content, and are therefore classified as hazardous

waste upon their disposal. Most fluorescent lamps are disposed of in the

domestic/commercial waste stream and not in hazardous landfills or treatment facilities.

Eskom estimates that in 2005/2006 around 137,8 million mercury lamps containing High

Intensity Discharge Lamps (HID), Linear Fluorescent Lamps (LFL) and Compact Fluorescent

Lamps (CFL) were imported. It is expected that due to the energy crises, the number of

CFL’s imported has increased significantly (www.eskom.co.za).

6 Waste initiatives in South Africa

6.1 National policy response

Since the last environmental reporting reporting in 2006, a number of policy and regulatory

instruments within the ambit of the new legislation promalgated during the same period,

has been developed. This has mainly been intended to respond adequately to the country’s

exisitng waste management challenges, but also to close existing policy gaps. Of importance

to note, is that most of the policy inctruments, including the promalgation of the Waste Act,

are fairly new and their implementation still to be full executed. The following provide a

summary of policy related responses.

National policy for the provision of basic refuse removal services to indegent households,

2011. The purpose of this policy is to address the basic service backlog amongst the poor

(indigent) households, particularly those essential services like refuse removal. The key

policy objectives are: Establishment of a framework for the development, identification and


34

management of indigent households within municipalities; set principles for the adoption of

by-laws for tarrif policy implementation; and awreness raising regarding proper handling of

domestic waste (e.g. minimisation and recycling) within municipalities.

National Policy on Thermal Treatment of general and hazardous waste, 2009. The policy

expresses the government’s intentions and commitment to allow for a range of

techgnologies, including thermal waste treatment, for inclusion in the country’s waste

management system that ensures sound environmental management of waste. It also

demonstrate government’s commitment to continous development and implementation of

waste management options that are also consistant to the waste management hierarchy.

This policy further closes the gap that existed for long regarding the treatment of waste,

since certain options were restricted due to lack of national policy direction on thermal

treatment, dedicated incineration and co-processing in cement production.

National domestic waste management collection standards. The standards are intended to

deal with the past in the provision of waste collection services. They aim to set acceptable,

equitable and sustainable collection services for residents to improve the quality of life

within communities and ensure clean and more acceptable places to live and work in. These

standards recognises the practical differences between areas based on cost efficiency of

delivery of services. They are based on the principles of equity, affordability and availability

of resources, practicallity and community participation.

The draft Waste Classification and Management Regulations. This draft regulation is in line

with NEM:Waste Act. The objectives of this regulation is among others to; regulate the

classification and management of waste in a manner which supports and implements the

provisions of the NEM:Waste Act; establish mechanisms and procedures for the listing of

waste management activities that do not require a Waste Management Licence; prescribe

requirements for the assessment of the environmental risk associated with disposal of waste

to landfill; prescribe requirements and timeframes for the management of waste; and

prescribe general duties of waste generators, transporters and managers.

Other interventions include introduction of various regulatory instruments such as Waste

tyre regullation, 2008 and Regulations on prohibition of the use, manufacturing, import and

export of asbestos and asbestos containing materials.

6.2 Provincial government’s response

The nature, composition, and quantities of waste generated can be predicted. Therefore,

waste management can be planned. The characteristics of waste management in the

country are similar to that of many developing countries (CSIR, 2009), and as the South

African economy grows and develops further, the pressure to provide sustainable waste

management services and facilities inherently increases. Waste streams begin at the point of

generation, flow through collection and transportation, separation for resource recovery,

treatment for volume reduction, recycling and/or energy recovery. Traditionally most solid

waste has been disposed at landfill sites. Recent growing recognition of the need for

resource conservation and environmental protection has increased solid waste recycling and

treatment before disposal in many developed countries.


35

Based on an analysis of waste generation in nine South African provinces, there is an

indication that waste generation continued to increase in all provinces over the last decade

to about a total of 12 million tons per year, see table 18. This has resulted in an increase of

about 2 million tons per year in a period of less than 10 years. The national average waste

generation rate is estimated at 0.8 kg/capita/day for more developed areas and 0.3

kg/capita/day for less developed areas of South Africa. Collection and transfer efficiency is,

however, not at the desired level compared to international standards. Waste disposal in

South Africa is mostly done to landfills, but it has been estimated that only 10% of landfills

are managed in accordance with the Minimum Requirements (Patrick, 2007).

The Provinces has a key role to play in decreasing the amount of waste, e.g. by putting in

place recycling policies and activities, in improving collection, transfer and disposal systems

and methods, and creating a provincial committed overall approach to improved waste

management in the province.

Province Predicted Total Waste

m3/year t/year

1. Eastern Cape 3 105 989 802 090

2. Free State 3 877 380 745 535

3. Gauteng 26 085 304 4 207 608

4. Kwazulu Natala 5 749 959 1 437 762

5. Mpumalanga 11 200 387 1 783 766

6. Northern Cape 956 369 191 669

7. Northern Province 2 374 864 623 678

8. North West 2 296 489 542 135

9. Western Cape 12 979 785 2 129 647

Total 68 626 526 12 463 890

Table 18 Summary of provincial waste generation predicted for 2010 (Patrick, 2007)

Influx and rapid urbanisation, plus social and political pressures, have put land at a premium

in the city and town areas of several provinces. Landfill sites once thought of as being at an

acceptable distance from residential areas, now sits in close proximity with housing. The

identification of acceptable disposal sites within an economically viable radius of collection

operations, has in highly dense provinces for some municipalities become more and more

problematic.


36

6.3 Local government’s response

The overall municipal waste service delivery target is to provide waste management services

to all urban and dense settlement households in South Africa. Waste management targets

are therefore be set to ensure that waste services is extended to all urban and dense

settlement households. These targets can be reached over time and in line with the targets

set in the National Waste Management Strategy (DEA, 2011) as well as in the Local

Government Turnaround Strategy (COGTA, 2009) and the Presidential Delivery Agreement

(COGTA, 2010).

The big metropolitan municipalities continue to allocate more budgets, appoint better

qualified staff, and have well organised structures to deliver this service. However, there is

still a need for continued strengthening and expansion of waste services to reach people still

without access. Levels of service differ markedly by type and size of the municipality. At

least 19% (or 1.4 million) of households in metros and secondary cities do not receive

weekly refuse services, with 23% of households in secondary cities making use of their own

refuse dumps. Outside these areas, 13% (or 726,000) of households do not receive any

refuse service or make use of on-site disposal. The General Household Survey of 2007

indicates that only 39% of households or 50% of the total population of South Africa is

receiving a regular waste collection service (CSIR, 2009). Service backlogs are highest in

metros and secondary cities (25% and 29% respectively), with rapid urbanisation placing

significant pressure on these municipalities (DEAT, 2008).

The overall backlog in the provision of solid waste services is arounds 2 million households,

with some 900,000 households not receiving any service. Recent information gathered by

Statistics South Africa furthermore suggest an substantial increase in the waste service

backlog. The backlog in waste service delivery was confirmed by the assessment of the

status of waste service delivery and capacity at local government level. Key findings from

the local government capacity assessment (DEAT, 2007) were as follows:

• The waste service function is often not accounted for in small rural towns

• In rural areas staffing is often skewed towards laborers with few middle and top

managers

• There is a shift towards outsourcing of the recycling function to small community

contractors

• A total of 87% of municipalities do not have the capacity or infrastructure to pursue

waste minimization

• More than 80% of municipalities are initiating recycling but projects are struggling

due to lack of capacity

• Metros and secondary municipalities have 54% of the national waste management

service backlogs.

One of the most noticiable interventions that can be undertaken by municipalities is the

introduction of waste exchange programs. The aim of Waste Exchange Programs is to

reduce the use of natural resources by encouraging the re-use of waste (as input resource)

amongst stakeholders in processing and manufacturing sectors. There have been several

attempts to run Waste Exchanges, but thus far, these have been unsuccessful.


37

7 Waste recycling industry in South Africa Waste recycling presents an opportunity to save resources, reduce the environmental impact

of waste by reducing the amount of waste disposed at landfills, and create employment

opportunities. Integrated waste management approaches, as espoused by the South African

applied waste management hierarchy approach, requires the implementation of sequential

applications of waste prevention, minimization, re-use, recycling, treatment and ultimately

disposal (as a last option). Therefore, recycling becomes a critical part of a holistic and

sustainable method of waste management.

In South Africa, the majority of commercial waste recycling initiatives has been developed

on an ad hoc basis and has been driven by the private sector, with little or no financial

inputs or support from the government.

Even though government has tried to stimulate waste recycling, by introducing waste buy-

back centers, garden waste drop-off centers, separation of different waste streams, such as

glass, paper/cardboard, cans, scrap metal, plastics and garden waste, these stimulation

efforts have so far been relative ineffective. This can be observed by the large quantities of

recyclable materials in the waste arriving at landfill sites, which is further confirmed by

informal salvaging.

The industry is recycling around 40% of all packaging and paper consumed. Figure 3 shows

the relative scale of the main components of the recycling industry by both turnover and

capital base. The glass-recycling sub-sector has a yearly turnover of about R200 mill, the

paper sub-sector R900 mill, and the plastic sub-sector a yearly turnover of about R800 mill.

The total capital base is estimated to around R1,65 billion. The paper recycling industry

alone has in recent years invested an estimated R400 million in recycling initiatives in South

Africa and large-scale investments have also been noted in the recycling of glass, cans and

plastics (PACSA, 2007).

Figure 3 Scale of recycling industry by product (Lowitt, 2008)

According to the findings by Global Insight, on behalf of the Department of Trade and

Industry (DTI), the plastics waste sector makes up the biggest contribution employing

Scale o f R ecycling Industry by P ro duct

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

Glass Paper Plastic

Turnover (Rm) Capital Base (Rm)


38

40,000 people, followed by cans (37,000), glass (16,800) and then paper (12,600), see

figure 4. Aluminium cans generate the most GDP and employment per ton recycled (Global

Insights, 2008).

Figure 4 Employment in recycling industry by product (DEA, 2009e)

There are significant opportunities for job creation in the recycling industry. Of particular

importance is the issue of where job creation gains are the greatest in the recycling process.

Given the capital intensive nature of the recycling process, however, recycling itself will

never be a major job creation source, but waste material collection and sorting, and job

creation via the development of new enterprises creating alterative products from waste

materials is full of potential. Waste collection is highly dependent on labour at present and

while there is potential for job creation at this stage, there may be a need in future to adopt

more efficient waste collection processes, which are less labour intensive, in order to

increase the rate and inflow of recyclable materials into the industry (Lowitt, 2008).

8 Waste treatment and disposal in South Africa

Waste management services rely heavily on landfills for the disposal of waste, which

account for the majority of licensed waste facilities. Over 90% of all South Africa's waste is

disposed of at landfill sites. This is despite the existence of a range of alternative disposal

technologies, including waste recycling.

The capacity assessment conducted by DEA, estimated the number of waste handling

facilities to be more than 1,300, of which close to 600 are licenced, see table 19 (DEAT,

2007).

Type of Facility Number of facilities

Number of permitted facilities

% backlog in permits

General Waste landfill site 1,203 524 56.4%

Emplo yment in R ecycling Industry by P ro duct

-

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

Glass Paper Plastic Cans

68%

70%

72%

74%

76%

78%

80%

82%

84%

86%

Employment % Employment in Supply Channels


39

Hazardous waste landfill site 77 41 46.8%

Medical waste storage facility 12 4 66.7%

Recycling facilities 9 2 77.8%

Transfer stations 35 12 65.7%

Total 1,336 583 56.4%

Table 19: Waste management facilities permit status, South Africa (DEA, 2007)

Waste disposal by landfill remain the most dominant method of disposal in South Africa, and

the reliance on waste disposal by landfills has limited the incentive to devise alternative

methods of dealing with waste. Furthermore, a urgemt need for addressing the backlog in

the permitting of landfill sites exists. It is critical that all waste facilities are permitted in

order to avoid potential negative environmental impacts, as it is through the permitting

process that any fatal flaws are identified, and mitigation actions prescribed.

9 Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Waste compliance and enforcement are dealt with in Chapter 7 of the Waste Act, which

describes the compliance powers of the Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry, waste impact

reports, offenses and penalties. This section must be read in conjunction with Chapter 7 of

the National Environmental Management Act, 107 of 1998, as amended, which establishes a

system of compliance monitoring and enforcement for all environmental legislation,

including the appointment of Environmental Management Inspectors (EMIs) at all levels of

government.

The Waste Act, Chapter 7, sets out a system of offences and penalties, and provides a list

of offences identified by Section 67 of the Waste Act as well as the associated penalties as

provided by Section 68. This information is presented per sphere of government and also

includes a list of compliance matters where they occur across all three spheres of

government.

Waste impact reports are an additional compliance monitoring measure created by the

Waste Act that can be utilized to deal with instances of suspected non-compliance or

transgression of norms and standards. Table 20 outlines the two circumstances in which a

waste impact report may be requested.

Sect Responsible Action

66.(1) Environmental Management

Inspector

Suspected contravention of failure to comply with the Act or any

conditions of a waste management license or exemptions, which has

had a detrimental effect on health or the environment.

66.(2) Waste management officer May request the preparation of a waste impact report if a waste

management license is under review (S53).

Table 20 Circumstances for requesting a waste impact report (NEMWA, 2008)


40

The Waste Act empowers the Minister of Water Affairs and Forestry to exercise the

Minister’s powers under section 19, 53 and 155 or the National Water Act, 1998, in regard to

contraventions of the Waste Act that impact on a water resource. Since the water legislation

has now been assigned to the Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs, these powers

are now vested in the same Minister. Therefore this is read as the Minister of Water and

Environmental Affairs may exercise the powers conferred to her in respect of listed waste

management activities (Sec 19) and review of waste management licenses (Sec 53). The

Minister also has powers in respect of the National Water Act where a person contravenes or

fails to comply with any condition of a waste management license, a remediation order or

measures specified in terms of section 38(3) that may impact negatively on a water

resource.

The primary arrangements for compliance monitoring and enforcement of the Waste Act are

not covered by the Waste Act, but by an amendment to the National Environmental

Management Act, 107 of 1998 (NEMA), which came into effect on 1 May 2005.

9.1.1 Environmental Management Inspectorate (EMI)

Chapter 7 of NEMA provides for Environmental Management Inspectors (EMIs) to be

designated by the Minister and provincial MECs. The Environmental Management

Inspectorate is a network of environmental enforcement officials drawn from different

government departments at national, provincial and local level. Officials from DEA, provincial

environment departments, other provincial organs of state, municipalities and parastatal

bodies can be designated as EMIs.

EMIs must monitor compliance with and enforce the specific environmental legislation that

they have been mandated to enforce. These mandates are determined when EMIs are

designated by the Minister or relevant provincial MEC. The Waste Act will form part of this

assignment, and that it may be assigned to dedicated EMIs responsible for its enforcement.

EMIs can also be mandated to enforce a range of legislation depending on their particular

functions, and it is possible for EMIs dealing with the Waste Act also to enforce related

legislation such as NEMA, and the regulations promulgated under NEMA, and the Air Quality

Act. EMIs are also empowered to enforce any authorisations issued under their mandated

legislation, including permits, licenses and EIA authorisations (records of decision).

EMIs have a number of important powers and responsibilities that enable them to enforce

environmental legislation. These powers include:

• Powers of inspection, such as entering premises to check compliance, and seizing

evidence of non-compliance

• Powers of investigation, such as interrogating witnesses, seizing documents, taking

samples and removing waste

• Powers of enforcement, such as search and seizure of premises, containers, vessels,

and vehicles, establishing roadblocks and making arrests

• Administrative powers such as issuing compliance notices.


41

The above powers are awarded to EMIs based on a ranking system, depending on

experience, qualifications and seniority. A grade 1 EMI has more powers than any other

grades of EMI.

9.1.2 Status of the Environmental Management Inspectorate (EMI)

The National Compliance and Enforcement Report (NCER) (DEA, 2009) provides a national

status and overview of environmental compliance and enforcement activities undertaken by

relevant institutions across the country during the period 2006-2009. According to this

reporting, the following trends have been reported:

• The increase of 37 (4.3%) Environmental Management Inspectors (EMIs) on the

national register, from 866 in 2007/8 to 903 in 2008/9

• The total recorded number of designated EMIs at 903, however, also includes

those officials who do not undertake compliance and enforcement activities at

the operational levels (for example, in DEAT, only 23 of the 44 EMIs are

operational – 52%)

• Employment migration / resignations of general EMIs from 344 to 269

(representing a 22% decrease), and for provincial parks boards in particular,

employment migration of about 37 leaving 232 EMIs to undertake functions

related to “blue” and “brown” sub-sectors

• 42 municipal authorities with undesignated EMIs.

The industrial branch of the Environmental Management Inspectorate continued to conduct

compliance inspections in the prioritized industry sectors, namely Operation Ferro, focusing

on the iron and steel and ferroalloy (ferrochrome, ferromanganese, ferrovanadium and

ferrosilicon) sector as well as the Refineries Project. The Department of Environmental

Affairs and Tourism and provincial departments, water affairs and forestry and officials from

municipalities conducted joint inspections. Table 21 provides a national perspective on the

work conducted by the EMIs:

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Reported cases - - 4,661

Criminal dockets registered - 1,762 2,412

Summons/arrests 898 2,614 2,547

Acquittals - 441 18

Convictions (number of accused convicted) 134 748 258

Civil court applications launched 11 2 3

Warning letters - 102 109

Table 21 Cases reported and handled by the EMI during 2006-2009 (DEA, 2009)


42

It can be noted from table 21, that the total number of reported cases in 2008/9 was 4,661,

and that:

• The total number of criminal dockets registered increased from 1,762 in 2007/08

to 2,412 in 2008/09 (an increase of 37%)

• The total number of acquittals decreased from 441 in 2007/08 to 18 in 2008/09

(decrease of 96%)

• The total number of convictions decreased from 748 in 2007/08 to 258 in 2008/09

(decrease of 50%)

• The total number of admission of guilt fines issued nearly doubled, from R744,706

in 2007/08 to R1,446,709 in 2008/09

• There has been a sligth increase in the total number of notices/directives issued

• The total value of S24G fines paid has more than doubled from R6,880,246 in

2007/08 to R15,499,518 in 2008/09, despite the fact that 267 fewer fines were

issued in 08/09.

It is apparent that the strengthening of EMIs for complience monitoring and enforcement

purposes results in increased compliance and monitoring activities and results, but also that

this area remains critical for the effectiveness of the environmental legislation.

9.1.3 Waste management officers (WMO)

The Waste Act provides for the appointment of Waste Management Officers, whose main

role is to co-ordinate waste management activities within and across the respective spheres

of government. The role of WMOs includes certain compliance monitoring and enforcement

functions. Their role in this respect must be aligned and coordinated with the compliance

monitoring and enforcement role fulfilled by EMIs.

The WMO system responds to the historical difficulty in implementing legislation and the

importance of achieving the objectives of the Waste Act. The Waste Act has responded to

these institutional challenges by providing for what are termed Waste Management Officers

(WMOs), as set out in Chapter 3 Sections 10 to 13. WMOs are to be appointed at national,

provincial and municipal level.

• 10 (1) The Minister must designate in writing an officer in the Department as the

National Waste Management officer responsible for coordinating matters pertaining

to waste management in the national government

• (2) The MEC must designate in writing an officer in the provincial administration as

the provincial waste management officer responsible for coordinating matters

pertaining to waste management in that province

• (3) Each municipality authorized to carry out waste management services by the

Municipal Structures Act, 1998 (Act no.117 of 1998), must designate in writing a

waste management officer from its administration to be responsible for coordinating

matters pertaining to waste management in that municipality.

The Waste Act therefore primarily envisages a coordination function for WMOs, although it

leaves the precise determination of their functions to the NWMS and regulations by the


43

Minister, see figure 5. The Act states that WMOs must co-ordinate their activities with other

waste management activities in the manner set out in the NWMS, or in terms of notice

published by the Minister in the Gazette.

Figure 5 Coordination structures for WMOs and Government (DEA, 2009e)

The Department has developed a guideline for the appointment of WMOs, which seeks to

further define the role, powers, profile and rank of the WMOs. This guideline needs to be

read in conjunction with the National Co-ordination Plan for the Implementation of the

Waste Act and its regulations. The generic duties of all WMOs are to coordinate matters

relating to waste management and to ensure implementation and coordination of the

National Waste Management Strategy. The WMOs may be delegated to perform other

duties buy their respective administration over and above their stipulated role in the

guideline.

In addition to this coordination of waste management activities, the Act assigns specific

regulatory powers to the National WMO and Provincial WMOs. In terms of Section 58 (1)

they may request the appointment of waste management control officers by holders of

waste management licenses, and in terms of Section 66(2) they may require the preparation

of waste impact reports when the waste management licenses are being reviewed.

Standing members: National WMO, Chief

Director: Pollution and Waste Management,

Provincial WMOs

Non-standing members: National

government depts /private sector reps

National Waste Forum

Subsumed into Working

Group II: Pollution and

Waste Session

Provincial Waste Fora

District Waste Fora

Standing members: Provincial WMO,

Municipal WMOs or pollution & waste

representativesNon-permanent members:

National WMO or his/her representative

Standing members: Municipal WMOs or

pollution & waste representatives &

Provincial WMO providing technical support

Annual work-plan giving effect to

legislation and policy including

capacity building, waste

management strategies, waste

information management,

provincial reports etc., and

annual waste indaba

Challenges, gaps & achievements

with respect to the act and

policy, capacity building,

provision of waste services,

waste minimization and

recycling, pollution, waste

information special projects,

municipal reports etc.

Same as above

Chairperson of WGII reports to MINTECH

Chairperson of PWF to report to WGII

WMOs to report to their municipalities


44

10 Conclusions and emerging issues

A number of conclusions can be drawn from the national status reporting on waste

management.

Firstly, it is clear that specific focus is placed in South Africa on the application of the waste

management hiereachy both in policies, strategies and implementation.

Secondly, since the last environmental reporting reporting in 2006, a number of key policy

and regulatory instruments within the ambit of the new promalgated Waste Act, has been

developed. These include e.g. national policy for the provision of basic refuse removal

services to indegent households; national policy on thermal treatment of general and

hazardous waste; national domestic waste management collection standards; waste

classification and management regulations (draft); waste tyre regullation; regulations on

prohibition of the use, manufacturing, import and export of asbestos and asbestos

containing materials.

Thirdly, clear roles and responsibilities of government institutions and the legislative

mandates for key spheres of government involved in waste management has been

developed. South Africa remains in the forefront on environmental waste management

amongst developing countries and is committed to implement a world class system that will

improve waste management in the country. The key development areas for the near future

include: (i) Service level agreements and contracting of services amongst key role players in

government, (ii) regionalisation of service delivery: The trend towards greater

decentralisation has a potential to complicate the waste management system. A new

emphasis on regionalisation means better efficiency and transparency of service, and (iii)

ring-fencing of solid waste finances: A system where all revenue collected from waste

management service provision is ring-fenced towards improving the same service is

desirable within government institutions.

Fourthly, that municipal solid waste management can be identified as one of the areas of

municipal functioning with the greatest potential for job creation, particularly with respect to

unskilled or semi-skilled labour. The estimate employment creation by the total waste sector

is around 113,000 people. It is estimated that the total annual expenditure on solid waste

management in South Africa is R10 billion per annum, 70% from the public sector, largely

local government, while 30% is private sector expenditure. The waste management service

function within municipailities contributes significantly towards municipal income and

revenue due to the user-pay principle applied for waste management. It is assessed that

municipalities received a total income of around R6.5 billion for solid waste.

Fifthly, that the analysis of the two main waste classess, i.e. general and hazardous waste,

shows a number of interesting findings:

• Municipal solid waste constitute a large percentage of the total waste generated in

urban and rural areas. Municipalities are the key players in dealing with general non-

hazardous waste. A total of around 239 municipalities performed solid waste

management functions servicing around 8,4 mill households, or around 64 % of all

households


45

• South Africa has experienced rapid growth in waste volumes, associated with a

prolonged period of economic growth. During the last decade, general waste

generation rose to nearly 67 million cubic metres, or by 62%. This represents an

annual average growth rate of around 5%

• The big metropolitan municipalities continue to allocate more budgets, appoint better

qualified staff, and have well organised structures to deliver waste services.

However, there is still a strong need for continued strengthening and expansion of

waste services to reach people still without access. The overall backlog in the

provision of solid waste services is around 2 million households, with some 900,000

households not receiving any service. The service backlogs are highest in metros and

secondary cities

• Waste recycling presents an opportunity to save resources, reduce the environmental

impact of waste by reducing the amount of waste disposed at landfills, and create

employment opportunities. In South Africa, the majority of commercial waste

recycling initiatives has been developed on an ad hoc basis and has been driven by

the private sector, with little or no financial inputs or support from the government.

The industry is recycling around 40% of all packaging and paper consumed

• Waste management services rely heavily on landfills for the disposal of waste, as

over 90% of all South Africa's waste is disposed of at landfill sites. The reliance on

waste disposal by landfills has limited the incentive to devise alternative methods of

dealing with waste. Furthermore, a urgent need for addressing the backlog in the

permitting of landfill sites exists

• For hazardous waste, a general lack of adequate reliable information exists making

quantifying mass balance for hazardous wastes difficult. An indication of the status

of hazardous waste in South Africa can be sourced from Provincial Hazardous Waste

Management Plans (HWMP). However, only three provinces have completed

Provincial Integrated Hazardous Waste Management Plans. It was e.g. found that in

Gauteng almost all hazardous waste generated is disposed to landfills, and that in

Western Cape and North West most hazardous waste generated is un-accounted for

in relation to treatment or landfilling

• South Africa currently has 11 licenced hazardous treatment facilities in operation with

a combined annual treatment capacity of approximately 57,600 tons. The current

treatment figures indicate a reserve treatment capacity of approximately 1,000 tons

per month.

A number of waste issues has emerged during the last years. Of particular interest shall e-

waste streams, waste-to-energy and the green economy be noted. Each of these emerging

issues are outlined below.

eWaste: Consisting of electrical and electronic waste (WEE), eWaste is a relatively new

waste category for which there is currently a lack of formal disposal mechanisms. Due to the

many hazardous components and materials used in the manufacture of electronic goods,

including mercury, brominated flame retardants, and cadmium, tis is considered a hazardous

waste stream. Used electrical goods are often imported into the country as donations – but

in some cases, what is being imported is effectively WEE. There is significant job creation

potential in the recycling of eWaste, and several initiatives have and are being set up. The


46

hazardous nature of this waste stream and the small margins of profit generated must be

carefully considered when encouraging the recycling of WEE.

Data and Information Management: The South African Waste Information System (SAWIS)

is refined through the development of a revised waste classification and management

system, and would be formalised through National Waste Information Regulations. The main

objective of waste data collection is to allow for adequate waste management planning and

prioritisation, and to enable national reporting on the success of national waste policy and

waste management initiatives aimed at moving waste up the hierarchy from land filling to

reuse, recycling, recovery or treatment. The SAWIS comprises a central registry and a data

capture facility. All waste management facilities as well as hazardous waste generators

(generating more than 20 kg/day) are required to register on the system. The waste

categorisation system will be incorporated into the National Waste Information Regulations,

and will be mandatory for the waste management industry to report in accordance with this

system once the WIS Regulations come into force.

Fluorescent Lamps: Fluorescent lamps contain a small amount of mercury which is used in

the illumination process. Mercury is a neurotoxin that can be harmful in even small amounts.

The promotion of compact floruorescent lamps (CFLs) by government and Eskom as an

energy saving measure has significantly increased the numbers of CFLs that require disposal

when expired. Although Fluorescent lamps can be successfully recycled and the mercury

recovered, no such facilities are currently available in the country.

Waste-to-energy: Some municipalities have begun waste-to-energy schemes. eThekwini is

extracting landfill gas and generating electricity from the Marian Hill and La Mercy landfills,

and Johannesburg has piloted energy generation from incinerating health care risk waste.

Energy recovery schemes are incentivised by the potential to generate carbon credits and

their associated revenues. It is estimated that landfill energy plants can have a capacity of

between 20 and 50 megawatts, with a life-of-plant of 30 years.

Green Economy: Over the last two years, the concept of a “green economy” has moved into

the mainstream of policy discourse. Transitioning to a green economy has sound economic

and social justification. For South Africa, and in the waste management sector in particular,

this transition would involve leveling the playing field for greener products by reforming

policies and developing incentives, strengthening market infrastructure, redirecting public

investment, and greening public procurement. For the private sector, this involve responding

to policy reforms and government incentives through increased financing and investment, as

well as building skills and innovation capacities to take advantage of opportunities arising

from a green economy in the waste management sector.

CASE : Modeling Domestic Waste Collection Methods: The Case of Mafikeng

Background Waste management remains a challenge for most municipalities in the country.

The problem is aggravated by the lack of strategies, financial resources, materials and

equipment, and skills required for waste management. Local communities are therefore in a


47

dilemma in keeping their surroundings clean. Communities and their municipalities find it

difficult to address this problem without support from other stakeholders. This therefore

calls for partnership interventions to address the problem. The Department of

environmental Affairs, through its Social Responsibility Programme (SRP), is piloting a

domestic waste collection project in partnership with the Mafikeng Local Municipality (MLM).

Partnership The department entered into a three year Service Level Agreement (SLA) with

the Mafikeng Municipality for the provision of waste collection services to the un-serviced

rural communities of Mafikeng. The SLA makes provision for the department to fund 75% of

the project budget, and the municipality funds 25% for the project which it pays on pro rata

basis. After the duration of the agreement, the municipality will take full responsibility for

the operation and sustainability of the project. The department further entered into a

memorandum of agreement with a service provider to manage the implementation of the

project for the period of three years.

Technical Support Despite the waste collection services that is rendered by the project to 31

231 households, the project is assisting the municipality to develop an Integrated Waste

Management Plan (IWMP) as well as to develop and implement a strategy for collecting

payments for the service, waste reduction and recycling programme, build human resource

capacity and systems to manage waste collection service, and provide sufficient landfill

capacity.

Waste Collection Methods Since this is the pilot, investigating and testing efficient, effective,

economical and labor intensive methods of waste collection is part of the project. The first

method that is being tested is the separation at source. This method will test the willing-

ness of residents to separate waste, quality of separated waste and recyclables, volume of

waste and recyclables, market value of collected recyclables, and cost saving from reduction

of waste entering the landfill. Testing of this method has opened up a business opportunity

for a group of local young people who have been put together to establish a cooperative

that will collect recyclables to the Material Recovery Facility (MRF), sort, weigh and sell

them to recycling companies. They have been assisted through the project to put together

a business plan.

Small Business Development The project has created and developed five local small

businesses. Five local people with drivers’ licenses were identified and assisted through the

project to access finance for purchasing the required vehicles and equipment for waste

collection. They are further subcontracted as SMEs to provide waste collection services for a

period of three years. Training on small business management was facilitated in order to

provide them with business management skills.

Employment Opportunities The project created work opportunities for 70 local people. Each

SME has appointed 14 people from the local communities as laborers for the period of three

years to collect waste from the households. They were provided with training on community

and environmental development as well as waste management.

Project Management and Oversight The appointed implementing agency is responsible for

the day- to-day management of the project and subcontractors and accounting to the


48

Project Steering Committee which is made up of 5 stakeholders i.e. local municipality,

district municipality, traditional authority, provincial department and national department.

This committee sits once a month to review operational progress and resolve operational

challenges facing the project. Strategic decisions of the project are made at the Project

Review Commit- tee (PRC) which sits quarterly and is composed of senior managers of

major project stakeholders i.e. municipally, implementing agency and the department.

Challenges The project is faced with two major challenges i.e. political and administrative

instability and financial sustainability. Political and administrative instability in the

municipality is paralyzing the project in a sense that the municipality is currently unable to

meet its obligations in terms of service level agreement. Its overall commitment to the

project is therefore inconsistent. Financial sustainability is a serious threat to the project.

From the survey of households conducted, it has been found that the residents are not

prepared to pay for the waste collection service. On the other hand, the municipality has no

financial muscles to finance this service.

Conclusion The model employed for waste collection has proved to be effective and can be

replicated in other municipalities. It is helping to keep the area clean at all times. It has

created small businesses, employment and training opportunities for local people. However,

the challenges posed by political and administrative instability and lack of financial

sustainability strategy has a potential to wipe off all the benefits and assets created by the

Project.


49

References

1. Alan F, David L (2008) e-Waste Association in South Africa - e-Waste Association of

South Africa

2. Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) (2009) Local

Government Turnaround Strategy – Working together, turning the tide in local

government. Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Pretoria

3. Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) (2010)

Delivery Agreement for outcome 9: A responsive accountable, effective and efficient

local government system. 5 July vs 4 EIA WIP

4. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) (2000) White Paper on

Integrated Pollution and Waste Management for South Africa: A policy on pollution

prevention, waste minimisation, impact management and remediation. Department

of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria. ISBN 0-621-3002-8

5. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) (2005) Implementation

plan for Transfer of the Waste Permitting Function. Department of Environmental

Affairs, Pretoria

6. Department of environmental Affairs (DEA), (2006) South Africa Environmental

Outlook. A report on the State of Environment. Department of Environmental Affairs,

Pretoria

7. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (2006). Implementation Plan for

Transfer of the Waste Permitting Function. Department of Environmental Affairs and

Tourism: Pretoria

8. Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism (DEAT) (2007). Assessment of the

Status of waste service delivery and capacity at local government level. Department

of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, Pretoria

9. Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) (2008) Generic guideline document for

developing industry waste management plans,. Department of Environmental Affairs,

Pretoria

10. Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) (2008) Guideline document for the

appointment Waste Management Officers – as provided for in section 10 of Nastional

Environment management: Waste Act, 2008. Department of Environmental Affairs,

Pretoria

11. Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) (2008) Survey of Generation Rates,

Treatment Capacities and Minimal Costs of Health Care Waste in the 9 provinces of

RSA . Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria


50

12. Department of Environmental Affairs (2009) National Compliance and Enforcement

Report (NCER), Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria

13. Department of Environmental Affairs (2009a) National waste quantification and

waste information system. Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria (August

2009)

14. Department of Environmental Affairs (2009b) National waste management strategy –

Phase 2 Research: Regulation, complience and enforcement in implementing the

Waste Act, 2008

15. Department of Environmental Affairs (2009c) National Environmental Management:

Waste Act, 2008 (Act no 59 of 2008) Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria

16. Department of Environmental Affairs (2009d) Producer responsibility and consumer

awareness. Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria

17. Department of Environmental Affairs (2009e) ‘National Waste Management Strategy

– Phase 2 Research: Macro-economic trends, targets and economic intruments’.

Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria

18. Department of Environmental Affairs (2009f) Cooperative governance, local

government and the waste planning system. Department of Environmental Affairs,

Pretoria

19. Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), (2011) National waste management

strategy. Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria

20. Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA), (2011) Draft Municipal Waste Sector

Plan. Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria (January 2011)

21. Department of Provincial and Local Government (DPLG), (2007) Policy process on

the System of Provincial and Local Government: Background: Policy Questions,

Process and Participation. Government Notice 936 Government Gazette No 30137 of

1 August 2007

22. Department of Provincial and Local Government (2007) Speech for the Minister for

Provincial and Local Government, Ms N. Hangana to be delivered at a conference on

waste management staged at the Emperors Palace, Johannesburg, from 22-23

March 2007

23. eWASA (2008) eWaste Assessment South Africa, November 2008

24. Fiehn, H and Ball, J. (2005). Background research paper: Waste. South Africa

Environment Outlook. National State of the Environment Project. Department of

Environmental Affairs and Tourism: Pretoria

25. Global Insight Southern Africa (2008) ‘Macroeconomic impact assessment of

recycling industry in South Africa’. Final Report


51

26. Goblatt, M (2009) Research paper ‘Macro-economic trends and economic

instruments’. Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria (August 2009)

27. Levin, P.S., M.J. Fogarty, G.C. Matlock and M. Ernst.(2008) Integrated ecosystem

assessments. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA Technical Memorandum. NMFS-

NWFSC-92

28. Lowitt, S (2008) ‘A preliminary Analysis of Plastics, Paper and Glass Recycling

Database: An introduction to the nature and dynamics of the industry’. Center for

Poverty, Employment and growth, Human Science Research Council

29. National Treasury (2008) ‘Local government budget and expedinture review’.

Pretoria

30. Oelofse, S and Godfrey, L (2008) Defining waste: Are we beyond the age of ‘waste’? SA Journal of Science 104 (7/8) 242-246

31. Oelofese, S (2009) ‘Addressing the challenges with waste service provision in South Africa: Waste sector challenges and vision report’ Council for Science and Industrial

Research, Pretoria

32. Patrick K and Stan M. Jewasikiewitz (2007) Waste Management And Sustainable

Development In South Africa. Environment, Development And Sustainability (2007)

9:163–185

33. Purnell, G (2009) ‘National waste quantification and waste information system’.

Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria (August 2009)

34. Republic of South Africa (RSA) (1996) The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Act No 108 of 1996

35. Republic of South Africa (RSA) (2008) Waste Tyre Regulations. Government Gazette

no. 31901 Gorvenment Printer, Pretoria

36. Republic of South Africa (2009) National Policy on Thermal Treatment of General and

Hazardous Waste. Government Gazette no.32439, 24 July 2009. Gorvenment Printer,

Pretoria

37. Responsible Packaging Association of Southern Africa on Industrial Packaging in South Africa (2009) Study on Industrial Packaging in South Africa, September 2009

38. Savage, D (2009) ‘National waste management strategy – Phase 2 Research: Co-

operative governance, local government and municipal doemstic waste services’.

Department of Environmental Affairs, Pretoria (August 2009)

39. Statistics South Africa (2007) Community Survey data - 2007/8 Annual financial indicators of municipalities (Release P9114). Pretoria

40. Statistics South Africa (2008) ‘Non-financial municipal census of municipalities for the

year ending June 2007’. Pretoria


52

41. Statistics South Africa (2009) ‘Non-financial municipal census of municipalities for the

year ending June 2008’. Pretoria

42. Universal Ownership: Why environmental externalities matter to institutional

investors. United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative and Principles

for Responsible Investment (2010)

http://www.unepfi.org/fileadmin/documents/universal_ownership.pdf

43. www.eskom.co.za

44. www.uniross.co.za

Chapter 9: Waste Management - soer.deat.gov.zasoer.deat.gov.za/dm_documents/Chapter_9__Waste... ·...

Documents

Transcript of Chapter 9: Waste Management - soer.deat.gov.zasoer.deat.gov.za/dm_documents/Chapter_9__Waste... ·...