Thesis (Doctoral)--Universitatis Gothoburgensis, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 100-102).

Thesis (M. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 1997. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 1999. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 186-194).

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1973. / Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.Sc.)(Geography)--University of Pretoria, 2007. / Includes summary. Available on the Internet via the World Wide Web.

Each year the problem of where to dispose and how to dispose of commercial, domestic and industrial solid wastes becomes worse. The growth rate of solid wastes continues to expand both because of the per capita increase in solid waste produced and because of population growth. Traditional disposal techniques such as dumps and landfills are becoming more expensive to operate mainly because of the lack of suitable land and the increased competition to obtain it. The growing inability of established disposal systems to handle the expanding solid wastes, generates further impetus to find new disposal techniques. Ignored environmental effects, particularly the growing pollution of air, land and water are no longer as acceptable to an increasingly pollution conscious public. With the changes in community attitudes towards the preservation of natural assets, disposal techniques previously too expensive to compete with traditional disposal techniques now are becoming more acceptable. The purpose of this thesis is to examine whether the benefits of using a new grinding disposal technique outweigh costs. The community selected for the analysis was the District of North Vancouver, British Columbia, which forms part of the Greater Vancouver Metropolitan Area. Presently, the District of North Vancouver operates a controlled landfill disposal technique known as the Premier Street Landfill. Various forms of air, land and water pollution occur at or from the site. The present landfill disposal technique is economically efficient with disposal costs of about $1.00 per ton of solid waste disposed. A benefit-cost analysis was conducted using the present landfill disposal technique as the control situation and the grinding disposal technique as the possible alternative. The point of view of the analysis was that of the Corporation of the District of North Vancouver which would be the decision making authority. For comparison purposes, different volume capacities were used in the analysis. The district's borrowing rate of 7% was used as the discount rate. Rates above and below the selected discount rate were also used in the analysis for comparison purposes. The value of net intangible benefits was also calculated to show what value would have to be placed on these benefits by the District of North Vancouver to justify the use of the disposal techniques involved in the analysis which were not as economically efficient. The results of the benefit-cost analysis showed that the present controlled landfill technique is economically more efficient than the proposed grinding disposal technique. The District of North Vancouver would consequently not be justified in converting to a grinding disposal technique under present conditions, unless the value of the net intangible benefits was accepted as a legitimate monetary expense. / Applied Science, Faculty of / Community and Regional Planning (SCARP), School of / Graduate

MSc., Faculty of Science, University of the Witwatersrand, 2011 / A survey was carried out on small and micro enterprises in the Braamfontein region of Johannesburg, to determine the aggregate compositions of solid waste materials generated and collected for recycling purposes, and to determine the attitude(s) and perception(s) of manager(s) and owner(s) of such enterprises, to the collection of solid their waste(s) for recycling purposes. A stratification method based on staff numbers was used to select 60 random samples of small and micro enterprises. Results reveal that 62% of these businesses were not collecting their solid wastes for recycling purposes, despite a high daily occurrence of recyclable (paper: 95%, plastic: 72% and organic: 68%) wastes in their daily waste streams. Low levels of collection by businesses were attributed to ‘time-factor’ issue in the collection of their recyclable wastes, while the provision of more recycling facilities in the area could improve their participation. Waste to landfill transportation trends in Johannesburg’s landfills were analyzed, as a measure of the waste problem in Johannesburg. Results suggest about 18% reductions in recycling waste materials transported to the various landfill sites in the city, from 2004 to 2008, and a 14% increase in other categories of general solid wastes for the same period. Despite the reductions in recycling waste materials recorded, the city recorded low levels of waste recovery practices for recycling purposes, particularly in small and micro scale commercial sectors. In achieving the City of Johannesburg’s wastes reduction goals, particularly the waste reduction targets set in the Polokwane Declaration, of reducing the amount of wastes disposed of by 50%, achieving a 25% reduction in disposable wastes by 2012 and to developing a zero waste plan by 2022 (City of Johannesburg, 2008), the municipality needs to play a pivotal role by providing needed recycling infrastructures, educating the society on the need for sustainable waste management and providing waste collection and management incentives.

No description available.

The comparison of alternative systems of disposing efficiently and effectively of four to five pounds of solid waste per person per day in the United States urban communities is undertaken by using Kazanowski's standardized cost -effectiveness methodology. The economic criteria for studying this problem are often limited to cost or marketable measures; in contrast, use of a cost -effectiveness approach allows the inclusion of non- quantifiable measures of effectiveness such as public acceptance, politics, health risks, environmental considerations, and soil benefits. Data from a case study in Tucson, Arizona, is used to illustrate the problem.