ISSUE 124
28 The case for infrastructure 30 Missed opportunity 38 New tyre recycling facility
Brokering collaboration between industry and government By Inside Waste
Image: APChanel/shutterstock.com
PFOS – a case study By Ruth Jarman, Dr Jackie Wright, Therese Manning, Dr Kate Langdon, and Dr Belinda Goldsworthy
PP: 100024538
ISSN 1837-5618
The world is made up of chemicals. When assessing risks from any chemical, it is important to acknowledge that the fundamental building blocks for the entire planet are chemicals. Whether it is the water we drink, the air we breathe, the food we eat, the ground we walk on, the houses we live in, the things we have in our houses or workplaces or what we ourselves are made of – everything is made from chemicals. Some chemicals are essential to keeping us alive or to let plants or other animals live. A range of chemicals are used in everyday items like food, clothes, computers, kitchen appliances, cars, houses, roads, trains, planes, hair dyes,
beauty products, toothpaste, shampoo and flea rinse for our pets etc. Other chemicals are naturally occurring, like spider and snake venoms or well-known poisons like arsenic or mercury. Given that everything in the world is made from chemicals, the presence or detection of a chemical in the environment does not equal an unacceptable risk to people or the environment. Rather it is the amount of a chemical that we are exposed to, how we are exposed to the chemical and sometimes when we are exposed to the chemical. This applies to the chemicals we manufacture as well as naturally occurring chemicals – some substances are quite benign, and some may be considered more toxic. For all chemicals, the potential to cause harm depends on the dose or amount that can get into our bodies. We use the human health and
ecological risk assessment process to determine if the amount of a chemical present in our environment could pose a risk to us or the environment around us. In Australia, we have established Government guidance on how to undertake a human health and ecological risk assessment. This guidance is not chemical specific, hence, is valid for all chemicals, including per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). There is no reason for PFAS to be treated any differently to other chemicals. It is our experience that treating PFAS differently to other chemicals can create practical, logistical, financial, health-based and communication issues. These issues can outweigh any positive effects and benefits that may be gained from applying an overly cautious approach to PFAS management. (Continued on page 18)
During a couple of days in November last year, a dedicated group of resource recovery delegates attended Circularity 2024, an event devoted to all things circular economy. The organisers brought together an array of experts from a variety of arenas within the industry to give their insights and opinions on a myriad of subject matters. One of the key features of the program was a round table featuring members of the Circular Economy Ministerial Advisory Group (CEMAG). Led by Professor John Thwaites, chair of the board for Climateworks Centre, the other members of the panel were Fortescue Innovation’s Dr Larry Marshall, Dr Dominique Hes from Greenfleet, and Planet Ark’s Paul Klymenko. Initiated by the Federal Minister for the Environment and Water, Tania Plibersek, the point of CEMAG is to “advise the Australian Government on the opportunities and challenges for Australia’s transition to a more circular economy”. There are 12 people on the advisory group, and they look into all aspects of the circular economy and its different sectors, such as mining, construction, infrastructure, roads and bridges, manufacturing, plastics, agriculture and food waste, resource recovery in waste streams, as well as water and wastewater. (Continued on page 23)
PROCESSING SOLUTIONS DISCOVER MORE
focusenviro.com.au
Picking Stations | Trommel Screens | High Torque Shredders | Grinders | Food Depackers