Mention the word “litter” in a conversation with a group of people and it is almost guaranteed that everyone present will have a horror story or example of the scourge of litter. Kloof Conservancy chairman, Paolo Candotti, will tell you about his distress at the quantities of litter seen during a weekend walk through the beautiful Krantzkloof Reserve. Local newspapers were full of appalling photographs of Durban harbour and the beaches, covered in layers and layers of littler flushed down the streams and rivers of KwaZulu-Natal after the recent heavy storms.

What is litter? It consists mostly of debris from the “throw-away society” that has characterised the late 20^th and early 21^st centuries. It is mainly the cast offs of manufactured materials and goods such as plastic bottles and containers, cans, plastic and paper wrappings, newspapers, shopping bags, fast food packaging, cigarette packets and butts,  cardboard and rotten or left over food. On a larger scale, urban litter can also include dead animals, old clothing, oil filters, discarded tyres, planks, broken bricks, pieces of concrete, branches and leaves, old mattresses and broken furniture.

Just give a thought to all of this ending up in stormwater drains. It blocks the drains and results in flooding which causes significant damage and costs for repair and restoration. Seventeen years ago, the cost of keeping stormwater drains and waterways clean of this disgusting detritus was over R2 billion (R2,000 million) per year (at an annual inflation rate of 6%, that converts to R5.37 billion in today’s money).

What are the main causes of litter? The main cause is the anti-social behaviour of individuals dropping litter indiscriminately and dumping household wastes illegally. (It is a lazy myth to suggest that dropping litter creates jobs for people to pick it all up.) Inadequate disposal facilities, including insufficient litter and public disposal bins has been cited as another cause, linked to the failure of authorities to enforce effective penalties to act as a deterrent to offenders. It has also been suggested that the failure of street sweeping services to rid pavements and curb sides of litter and rubbish has also reinforced the “acceptability” of litter. Some municipalities have claimed that street sweeping was cut because it was an extravagant and unnecessary “beautification” cost, rather than an important, preventative function for keeping stormwater drains clear.

Litter – Negative Social, Environmental & Economic Impacts –Social & Human Health Impacts –       Unsightly, smelly and dirty –       Can promote transmission of disease –       Tyres and containers can provide mosquito breeding areas –       Sharp objects can injure –       Psychological degradation of areas due to littering –       Environmental Impacts o   Injure, trap, suffocate, strangle or poison pets and wildlife o   Contamination of soil and water o   Blockage of stormwater drains –       Economic Impacts o   High cost of clean-up of illegal dumping o   High cost of extra litter clean up teams o   Lowering of property prices in affected areas o   Reduction of tourism in affected areas

There is no simple or straightforward solution to littering. It requires a long term strategy which includes a widespread change in the social behaviour regarding the use and discarding of resources. (Let’s start by not using the word “waste”, but instead regarding it as a resource that we haven’t yet found a use for?) The “consumer society” must go back to a more practical and family based focus upon the resource hierarchy model of  use, reuse, repair, recycle and return.

Municipalities need to revisit their budgets on “waste management” and look at the preventative aspect, as well as the reactive component of waste disposal. In other words, spend money on community education, enhanced street sweeping to protect stormwater drains, strengthen the provision of disposal facilities such as litter bins and public skips, invest in recycling facilities even to the point of cross subsidising costs to make recycling more financially stable and sustainable, and build the brand of “sustainable use and management of resources” instead of the negative reactionary philosophy of “waste disposal”. From a corrective point of view, there needs be a stronger deterrent and penalty for littering and miscreants need to be made to understand their wrong doing. (How about 200 hours of community service picking up litter or cleaning fouled-up rivers?)

People must be proud of their community and environmental space and be committed to keeping it clean and attractive. There needs to be “buy-in” from all sectors of Society and an understanding by all of the financial and non-financial benefits of a clean and healthy environment. Section 24 of the South African Constitution  says that, “…everyone has a right to an environment that is not harmful to their health or well-being… “ That won’t just happen, we have to make it happen. So, as a citizen committed to the Constitution,  what are you going to do to maintain that right?

Arend Hoogervorst is an environmental scientist with some 36 years of experience in South Africa in environmental management and sustainable development in local and central government, commerce and industry and private practice.

© Arend Hoogervorst, 2017.

Have you ever said things to yourself like, “It’ll never happen to me”, or “It won’t affect me”, “I can never do that”, or “It doesn’t apply to me”? Do these phrases sometimes come back and bite you?

In the environmental business, we get many issues that do just that. I am not just talking about “the public”. We professionals get caught out as well. It is often on matters where we are entrenched in the detailed knowledge of “the business”. We know it all, we’ve seen it all and we’ve even got the T-shirt…..

One of my more embarrassing experiences in this area was with zero waste. I had worked with many companies and managed to bring down their waste generation to single digits. I then read a book by Gunter Pauli called “Upsizing – The Road to Zero Emissions, More Jobs More Income and No Pollution”. Pauli observed that industry works to priorities such as fast returns on investments and maintaining a focus on the core activities of the company.  He postulated that core activities are not an end in itself, as believed by corporate strategists, but a beginning. There is a need for diversification and cooperation, for more from less, for Upsizing. He said that to operationalise Upsizing, we must stop expecting the earth to produce more but start doing more with what the earth produces. As an example, he quoted agro-forestry  where less than 5% of its output is effectively used and 95% is discarded. If the economic system were to use that 95%, it would be possible to satisfy 20 times more material needs without expecting the earth to produce more. Think about all the extra jobs, more productive industries and reduced waste streams.

This was enough for me to start thinking creatively about all the “lost opportunities” that so many industries were casting aside because, “..their Return On Investment was longer than two years..”  Through such creative thinking, we managed to turn a company around from facing a massive investment in a new multi-million rand water treatment plant, to a change in production sequencing which not only reduced the quantities of waste effluent produced, but also reduced the quantities of potable water utilised.

Some of you may have read my past comments on my own efforts in reducing my water consumption and generating electricity from solar panels. You may have said to yourselves, “…that doesn’t apply to me”, “other people can do that, I can’t.”  I read a number of articles and journals which may give you cause to re-think.

An article in a recent issue of the “Mail & Guardian” suggested that perhaps Eskom electricity was becoming too expensive for many to afford. It was suggested that the poor just stopped paying for electricity and the more affluent classes were beginning to cut back on electricity usage and switch to alternative energy sources such as photo voltaics, wind power and solar geysers.

It was reported that for the first time recently, the UK did not need to use coal to generate Grid electricity  for a full 24 hours, making use of alternate energy sources such as wind power, gas, and photovoltaics, instead. In the same article, it reported that the UK subsidiary of Unilever was sourcing 100% of its electricity requirements from Scottish wind farms.

So, have you done everything that you possibly can to reduce your reliance on grid electricity, cut your wasteful consumption of potable water and reduce the amount of recyclable materials that you put out in your black garbage bags every week?

Just a last word. Strategists are beginning to suggest that petrol and diesel combustion engine cars may stop being produced in Europe as soon as 2025. Can I refer you back to my first paragraph above?

Arend Hoogervorst is an environmental scientist with over 30 years of experience in South Africa in environmental management and sustainable development in local and central government, commerce and industry and private practice.

© Arend Hoogervorst, 2017.

How much do we appreciate water?  No, seriously, have you thought about how important clean, fresh water is to you and what it would be like without it? No, of course not, you are used to opening a tap and using as much as you want. It’s cheap, we are told it is one of our constitutional rights, so why should we worry about how much we use or where it comes from?

Facts and Figures ·         Approximately 0.024% of the planet’s water supply is available for human use as liquid freshwater in underground deposits, lakes, rivers and streams. ·         South Africa is a water scarce country, the 30th driest country in the world. ·         South Africa has an average rainfall of less than 500mm, the world average is 850mm. ·         South Africa loses between 37 and 42% of its potable water through leaks, wastage and illegal connections. Sources: SA Government Press Briefing on Water Scarcity and Drought – 13 November 2015, Living in the Environment, G Tyler Miller, S E Spoolman, 18th Edition, Cengage Learning, 2015.

I am not saying that I am any better or any worse than anyone else but I think the concept of optimising water consumption only really “hit” me, practically (as opposed to academically), after I took the decision to manage my own water usage more effectively. That doesn’t mean I decided to go completely “off the grid” and resort to borehole water and water harvesting, but I looked at how I could use water more optimally. I first began to look at how much water we, as a household, were using.

The daily water readings I took, trying to relate usage to consumption were an initial eye opener. One begins very quickly to realise how much potable water[1] is used for non-potable purposes. The table below shows an interesting breakdown resulting from studies.

Water Use in Households

	Low-Income Household	Mid to High-Income Household
Toilets	73%	37%
Baths & Showers	19%	32%
Washing Machine	NA	17%
Other e.g. cooking, washing dishes and clothes, drinking, etc.	8%	14%

 Households with Gardens 

Gardening	46%
Other	54%

(Source: Water – How is it used at home, HE Jacobs, LC Geustyn and BF Loubser, 2005)

I decided to make better use of my rainwater tanks (I had two which were only used for watering gardens and the washing of cars) by connecting them to my toilet water cisterns via a pump (which was, incidentally, solar powered.) The current on-going drought prompted me to add a third tank at the back of the house and link it to the first tank. This meant that I had a total of 4,700 litres of water available for toilet flushing.

Yes, I did consider the option of moving away from a water borne sewage system but I decided it was a little too complex and could be better managed in a two stage change at some point later in time. Change is tough so it is best to tackle it in manageable, bite size chunks.

We introduced a more disciplined toilet flushing regime where we didn’t flush the toilet after every use  and started filling the toilet cisterns, not connected to the rainwater tank, with a bucket. There is nothing better to focus the mind on “cost” than to relate effort and inconvenience to reward. This is much more difficult for the urban dweller. We didn’t compromise on hygiene and cleanliness but realised that a flush was not required after every use.. The consequence of this was that one heavy rainstorm filled the main tank and that full tank lasted us for three months until the next set of rains arrived. (Remember that although our inland dams were not getting rainfall, we on the coast were getting more frequent rains which filled the rainwater tanks.)

So, what we didn’t do was to change the washing machine to a lower water usage model or make use of grey water. Grey water usage requires more thought and more adaption to our plumbing which I was also not ready to face at this time. When the washing machine needs replacing, guess what is going to be one of the top requirements after energy efficiency?

It was quite a surprise to realise that, with a little thought, self-discipline, modification (and, yes, some money), we managed to drop our monthly water usage from over 12 kilolitres[2] down to below 5 kilolitres. OK, so it has little impact upon the wider drought situation but if we all took this on as a community responsibility issue and if thousands of people dropped their water consumption, then we might be in a better position to “weather the drought”…

[1] Potable water is water that has been filtered, cleaned, or treated to meet the standards for drinking water.

[2] One kilolitre is 1,000 litres.

Arend Hoogervorst is an environmental scientist with some 35 years of experience in South Africa in environmental management and sustainable development in local and central government, commerce and industry and private practice.

© Arend Hoogervorst, 2016.

 “…There is no such thing as chance or accident; the words merely signify our ignorance of some real and immediate cause…”

Adam Clarke

Introduction

After incidents and accidents, most organisations go through some form of review or soul-searching to ask themselves if they could have done things better. The problem with this is that often company staff are too close to the systems to be honest (consciously and unconsciously) and often the phenomena of “industrial blindness” means that they are unable to objectively observe shortcomings or areas for improvement.

Any improvement, or reflection on improvement, needs to occur fairly soon after the incidents or accidents, whilst the memories of the events are still fresh. By bringing in an outside, “disinterested party”, it is possible to collect valuable evidence and intelligence which can be constructively used to make improvements and close any gaps in response and reactivity that may exist in the company’s systems, awareness, procedures, training and response mechanisms.

Process

There are many different processes and routes that can be taken to guide the activities for review. They depend very much upon how much the company is willing to spend and what information it would like to gather. Before costing the review exercise, it is important to have a meeting between the company and the external reviewer:- to establish an outline understanding of the event or occurrence; and define a scope of work and activity. This can then result in a cost effective and optimal proposal which can lead to a useful document for continuous improvement purposes within the company.

Topics to be reviewed

The following pointers are a sample of the topics that should be covered in the review:-

• Cause

Was the cause of the incident covered in the corporate risk assessment, risk policy and or aspects and impact register? Was it covered by the company’s ISO 9001, 14001, OHSAS 18001/ ISO 45001, ISO 31001, ISO 37101, etc. certified or aligned systems?

• Response

Was there a response plan based upon the scenarios developed in the planning of the emergency response plan/policy/procedure?

• Response Team

Was the response team adequately briefed and trained to deal with the incident? Is there an effective succession plan in place to cover temporary or permanent absences of key management and technical staff in the response plan?

• Communication

Was communication to identified and appropriate stakeholders on the incident spelled out in a communication strategy/procedure, including who to communicate with, what to say to them and how to maintain the dialogue? Was anyone tasked to track and file media coverage of the incident and feedback strategic content to the response team and or senior management?

• Decision-making

Was there a structure in place to ensure that any necessary high level decision could be taken, passed down to the response teams and communicated to stakeholders and the media timeously?

• Record keeping

Was there a mechanism is place to ensure that key information from the incident, as it unfolded, was fully recorded, documented and circulated to pre-identified key decision making individuals?

• Incident Investigation

Was there a multi-dimensional incident investigation process/procedure in place to commence investigating cause and effect as soon as possible?

• Training

Were staff sufficiently trained and empowered to deal quickly with the incident and minimise the damage/loss/cost? Could hesitation or delay be put down to lack of confidence due to inadequate training, exercising or sequential tasks steps?

• Procedures

Are there procedures in place to respond to the incident? If so, were they successful? If not, why not and what was used in their place?

• Recurrence

Is the incident isolated or could it occur again in the same, or similar, form elsewhere in the company?

Concluding Thoughts

The passing of time generally means that it is very difficult to completely “undo” the consequences of accidents and incidents. If it is possible, this may take a long time and may cost considerable resources.

It is crucial to look forward and learn from the experience, good or bad. Fobbing off the incident as “a freak chance” or “not likely to happen again” is not constructive. Minimising the possibility of recurrence requires careful deliberate investigation, root cause identification and modification and change of systems procedures, training and preparedness. It may even require the implementation of a change management process to test options and alternatives.

Arend Hoogervorst

EMS Auditor

Eagle Environmental