The concerns about long-term landfill management expressed by experts across scientific disciplines like Wanless and Sachs are shared by Nick Lapis, the director of advocacy at Californians Against Waste. “The problem with landfills is that they never go away. You have to manage them in perpetuity, and there isn’t a liner or cap that is warrantied to last for that long,” he says. “And they’re not stable. They move and shrink as their contents decay, and the plastic liners will get brittle and crack as the pressures cause them to fold over on themselves. Sooner or later they will fail, as will the clay liners, and the effects of any failure can be absolutely devastating on the environment.” He adds, “From a financial standpoint the original owner, if [the landfills] were privately owned, is often long gone by the time they fail, so taxpayers will be left on the hook.”
Environmental Impact of Landfills:
The most pressing environmental concern regarding landfills is their release of methane gas. As the organic mass in landfills decompose methane gas is released. Methane is 84 times more effective at absorbing the sun’s heat than carbon dioxide, making it one of the most potent greenhouse gases and a huge contributor to climate change.
Along with methane, landfills also produce carbon dioxide and water vapor, and trace amounts of oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, and non methane organic compounds. These gases can also contribute to climate change and create smog if left uncontrolled.
The creation of landfills typically means destroying natural habitats for wildlife. The average landfill size is 600 acres. With over 3,000 active landfills in the United States, as much as 1,800,000 acres of habitat have been lost.
While landfills are required to have plastic or clay lining by federal regulation, these liners tend to have leaks. This can result in leachate, a liquid produced by landfill sites, contaminating nearby water sources, further damaging ecosystems.
Leachate can contain high levels of ammonia. When ammonia makes its way into ecosystems it is nitrified to produce nitrate. This nitrate can then cause eutrophication, or a lack of oxygen due to increased growth of plant life, in nearby water sources. Eutrophication creates “dead zones” where animals cannot survive due to lack of oxygen. Along with ammonia, leachate contains toxins such as mercury due to the presence of hazardous materials in landfills.
Uncontrolled waste fires burn at much lower and inconsistent temperatures, which means combustion is incomplete. This releases substances from the waste and creates new ones as molecules are decomposed and reformed in the flames. Dioxins and related compounds are often formed when PVC is burned in open fires. At least 30 of these types of compound are considered harmful to human health. They can persist in the environment for years and in the human body for perhaps a decade or more. There is evidence they can damage the brain and disrupt hormones.
While there is no doubt that the prevention of municipal solid waste (MSW) generation should sit at the top of any public policy, industrial strategy and individual behaviour, just like reducing the consumption of energy, this proposition might mislead the public into thinking that waste can suddenly disappear if only we had the will to make it happen. Despite these unattainable expectations, the ‘Zero Waste’ concept has become a viral and omnipresent phrase in recent years. A Google search of this term shows around half a million hits, as of March 2020, and countless government and non-governmental organisation initiatives worldwide. Zero Waste seems to be the only acceptable aim for today’s politicians who embrace an environmentally friendly platform. As a result, countries and municipalities all over the globe have committed themselves to achieving the goal of Zero Waste. So far, however, nobody has managed it, and given the many scientific and practical roadblocks, no one ever will.
By hiding the real costs of landfills to the public, the true value of recycling is hidden, as well as the critical gains from avoiding environmental disasters associated with releases from waste containment. Bad decisions will follow from incorrect price signals to public decision makers when the cost of prevention cannot be compared to the future costs of managing environmental calamities.
A major cause of under-pricing landfills is the failure of landfill companies or the municipalities to account for the long-term liability of existing landfills, in contravention to the most basic rules for recognizing future costs that will be incurred by failing to act prophylactically today.
Clearly, inclusion of these liabilities on the books as required by standard accounting practice will lead to long-term costs for cities and landfill companies and will have an adverse effect on value and stock price. Current accounting of landfills must be modified to cover generational costs. This will finally give the public realistic measures of current costs vs. future risks, including future costs and future impacts on climate change.
….
Determining the real-world financial risks of the current system is absolutely necessary for the public and officials to make the choices that will govern the laws on post-closure management and liability for the next generations. It is impossible to evaluate future municipal financial health without these inclusions.