Hello this assignment is not that complicated you just have to find the answers from the slide of week 7 and week 8 that I have attached. I have also attached the assignment question paper . this assi

Waste Production in North America ▪ One-third of all global waste comes from less than 5% of the global population . ▪ Municipal solid waste – Increased 3x from 1960–2005 – Per capita increase of 70% from 1960–1990 3 Source: Data from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Bureau of Mines, and Statistics Canada. Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Garbage: Municipal Solid Waste ▪ Per person, 777 kg of garbage is produced ▪ Waste management costs $2.6 billion ▪ E-waste growing rapidly (725 000 tonnes) 4 Source: Statistics Canada Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. What D oes It M ean to L ive in a H igh- W aste S ociety ? ▪ Wasting valuable resources – North Americans spend more $ on trash bags than 90 other countries spend on everything – Each year, we throw away • 670 000 tonnes of edible food • 186 billion pieces of junk mail • 50 million computers • Enough diapers to go from the E arth to the moon and back seven times 5 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Producing Less Waste ▪ Waste M anagement – High-waste approach – Burying, burning, shipping ▪ Waste R eduction – Low-waste approach – Refuse, reduce, reuse, recycle, rethink, and recover 6 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Priorities in Waste Reduction 7 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. How C an W e R educe S olid W aste ? ▪ Consume less ▪ Redesign manufacturing processes and products to – Use less material and energy – Produce less waste and pollution ▪ Develop products easier to repair, reuse, remanufacture, compost, and recycle ▪ Design products to last longer ▪ Eliminate or reduce unnecessary packaging 8 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. What I s I ndustrial E cology ? ▪ Design industrial processes to mimic nature – Recycle and reuse – Resource exchange webs (like food webs) – Biomimicry in innovation 9 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Industrial Ecosystem 10 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. What I s a S ervice- F low E conomy ? ▪ Renting services instead of buying things ▪ Companies makes more profit if they use minimum materials, product easy to maintain, repair, remanufacture, reuse , or recycle ▪ Eco - L easing ▪ Renting the services that goods provide ▪ Minimal ownership of physical goods 11 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Reuse ▪ Reduces resource use ▪ Saves input energy and money ▪ Reduces pollution and waste ▪ Creates local jobs ▪ Design products for reuse – Shopping bags, food containers, shipping pallets, etc. 12 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Energy Consumption of 350 mL B everage C ontainers 13 Source: Data from Argonne National Laboratory. Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Recyling ▪ Primary ( closed-loop ) – Turn waste into same class of product ▪ Secondary ( open-loop ) – Downcycling ▪ Pre - C onsumer vs . Post - C onsumer 14 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Composting ▪ Recycling plant nutrients to soil ▪ Of biodegradable wastes, – Some European cities compost 85% – North Americans only compost 5% ▪ Large-scale vs . backyard vs . vermicompost 15 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. How S hould W e R ecycle S olid W aste ? ▪ Option 1: Centralized recycling of mixed waste (MRF) 16 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. How Should We Recycle Solid Waste? ▪ Option 2: Separation at source – Less air and water pollution – Lower cost – Uses less energy – Provides more jobs – Produces more valuable recyclables – Education benefit but dependence on consumer 17 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Case S tudy : Is It F easible to R ecycle P lastics ? ▪ Only 10% recycled ▪ Challenges – Difficult to isolate from mixed resins and stabilizers – Low material yield – Low primary resource cost 18 Source: Adapted from Society of the Plastics Industry Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Why D o W e N ot H ave M ore R euse and R ecycling ? ▪ Prices do not reflect the product life- cycle . ▪ Higher tax breaks on resource extraction ▪ Low tipping fees ▪ Fluctuating demand ▪ Minimal product stewardship 19 © Syda Productions/Shutterstock Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Burning Solid Waste:

Waste-to-Energy Incineration • Reduced trash volume • Less need for landfills • Low water pollution • Quick and easy 20 • High cost • Air pollution (especially toxic dioxins) • Produces a highly toxic ash • Encourages waste production • Discourages recycling and waste reduction Advantages Disadvantages Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Waste-to-Energy Incinerator 21 Source: Adapted from EPA, 1990, Let’s Reduce and Recycle. Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Burying Solid Wastes ▪ Open dump (illegal in Canada) ▪ Sanitary landfill – Leachate collection – Monitoring wells – Landfill gases 22 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Sanitary Landfill 23 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Sanitary Landfills • No open burning • Little odour • Low groundwater pollution if sited properly • Can be built quickly • Low operating costs • Can handle large amounts of waste • Filled land can be used for other purposes • No shortage of landfill space in many areas 24 Advantages Disadvantages • Noise and traffic • Dust • Air pollution from toxic gases and volatile organic compounds • Releases greenhouse gases (methane and CO 2) unless they are collected • Groundwater contamination • Slow decomposition of wastes • Discourages recycling and waste reduction • Eventually leaks and can contaminate groundwater Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. What I s H azardous W aste ? ▪ Any discarded solid or liquid that has the potential to harm people ▪ Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System ( WHMIS ) – Labelling – Training – Information 25 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Hazardous Waste in Y our Ho me 26 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. What T o D o W ith H azardous W aste ? ▪ Management – Output approach – Burning or burying – Expensive – Pollution outputs ▪ Reduction – Input approach – Reuse or recycle – Consider non -hazardous alternatives 27 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Priorities F or D ealing W ith H azardous W aste 28 Source: Data from U.S. National Academy of Sciences. Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. How C an W e R emove or D etoxify H azardous W aste ? ▪ Physical methods – Distillation, filtration, precipitation ▪ Chemical methods ▪ Bioremediation – Using bacteria or enzymes ▪ Phytoremediation – Using plants or algae 29 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Phytoremediation 30 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. 31 Phytoremediation : Trade-offs Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Deep Underground Wells: Trade-offs 32 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Surface Impoundments : Trade-offs 33 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Secure Hazardous Waste Landfills 34 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Case Study: Lead ▪ Key P roblem : Lead poisoning in children ▪ Sources – Leaded gasoline (phased out by 1990 but took longer in developing countries) – Lead paints – Lead in plumbing 35 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Case Study: Lead Poisoning Solutions 36 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Case Study: Mercury ▪ Key P roblem : Aquatic contamination ▪ Sources – Vapourized elemental Hg – Inorganic particulate Hg 2+ salts – Organomercury compounds in fish 37 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Case Study: Cycling of Mercury in Aquatic Environments 38 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Case Study:

Mercury Pollution Solutions 39 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Case Study: Dioxins ▪ Potentially highly toxic and persistent chlorinated hydrocarbons in contaminated food ▪ Sources – Waste incineration – Fireplaces – Coal-fired power plants – Paper production – Sewage sludge 40 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Achieving a Low-Waste Society ▪ Local grassroots action ▪ International ban on 12 persistent organic pollutants (the dirty dozen) ▪ Key Principles – Everything is connected . – There is no “ away .” – Dilution is not the solution . – Produce less pollutants, reuse, and recycle . 41 Copyright © 2017 by Nelson Education Ltd. Conclusion ▪ Societies produce waste . ▪ The k ey is to manage that waste such that it doesn’t harm ecosystems or populations . ▪ Some waste is more toxic than others . ▪ Reducing waste and better management are among the solutions . 42