Taiwan Today

Taiwan lacks adequate waste disposal ca­pacity: not enough landfills, not enough solid waste incinerators. This is largely attribut­able to three fac­tors. The island’s land area is limited, one-fourth that of Florida. Its popula­tion density is the second highest in the world after Bangladesh. And the local populace is reluctant to allow waste treat­ment facilities to be built in or near their communities, often referred to as the NIMBY [Not In My Back Yard] syndrome. But lack of capacity is only part of the problem. In order to complete the picture it is necessary to take a close look at what happens in the place where so much of Taiwan’s garbage originates—the home.

Most island residents live in low- or high-rise apartment buildings. Every day, families either put their trash out on stair­well landings for pick up by collectors hired by building management or (more commonly) leave their garbage on the street. Despite government campaigns to promote garbage separation, it is seldom practiced. A typical trash bag might con­tain aluminum cans, PET bottles, glass, bamboo chopsticks, food, styrofoam, paper, and plastic products. Standardized trash bags are not often used, and most garbage is simply stuffed into small plas­tic shopping bags that split easily.

Residential waste collectors then cart these noisome bundles to desig­nated pick up points in each residential neighborhood—usually on or next to a sidewalk. Some, but by no means, all of the pick up points have dumpsters. These, however, can normally hold only about half of the garbage delivered to them daily. The result is spreading piles of small plas­tic bags and loose trash. Trucks operated by municipal departments of environmen­tal protection collect the trash from in and around the bins each evening, and take it directly to landfills, where it is dumped and buried.

This is not a system that lends itself to clean, efficient recycling. Only a fraction of recyclable domestic waste is recovered. Hazardous waste, along with trash that is otherwise combustible, takes up scarce landfill space. According to the Environ­mental Protection Administration (EPA), more than 80 percent of Taiwan’s solid waste is disposed of in landfills. By 1995 almost two-thirds of the island’s landfills were either full or nearing capacity, and many are now over capacity.

Meanwhile, although more than 80 percent of solid waste collected annually is combustible, only 10 percent is actually incinerated. Taiwan’s five working incin­erators cannot handle much more than this anyway. But even when incinera­tion capacity is raised to its planned level of 70 percent of solid waste collected an­nually, problems with trash separation and disposal in the home, if not addressed, will continue to reduce the efficiency of the waste management system. In the mean­ time, how are problems of waste disposal capacity being dealt with?

For a variety of reasons, including concerns over quality of life and health issues, as well as for economic and trade reasons, government efforts to address the burgeoning waste problem have become increasingly urgent. But the local waste management industry is having difficulty meeting the challenge, and the public is growing impatient with the way in which the situation has been handled. In a frank assessment of waste management efforts to date, the EPA admits that: “There has been a lack of investment in necessary pollution-related public facilities. Existing sanitary landfills and incinerators are insufficient, thus threatening public health. The construction of such facilities is therefore an urgent priority.”

Don Birch, chairman of the Swire Group Taiwan, which operates an Asian joint venture with Browning-Ferris Indus­tries, a global leader in the waste manage­ment field, likes to put the problem in context. “From an international point of view, the amount that Taiwan spends on waste management compared to other developed countries is very low. Whether we’re talking about household trash or mer­cury compounds from factories, between where we are today and where we should be, there’s a gap.”

The gap is partly attributable to inadequate funding of waste management serv­ices around the island. Lin Chun-yi (林俊義) is director of Taipei’s Depart­ment of Environmental Protection (DEP), the organization in charge of collection and disposal of the city’s garbage. “Our budget has never really been sufficient, and the job is still not being done as well as it could be,” he explains. “But we are doing the best we can with what we have. We’re facing extreme budget cuts that are forcing us to increase efficiency and cut costs. A key initiative is to mechanize our collection operations and reduce man­power. We’re fortunate in that at least we have very good disposal facilities operat­ing and under construction. They include an incinerator that can handle 1,800 tons of waste per day, which is due to come on line by the end of 1997.”

Waste disposal problems faced by many county and city governments have been caused largely by the inability to secure sites for disposal facili­ties, particularly because of the NIMBY syn­drome. Communities near selected landfill and incinerator sites are increasingly vo­ciferous in their opposition to government plans for construction of such facilities, and they have often forced projects to be delayed or even abandoned. “Taipei city has its own modern landfill and disposal capacity, and is self-sufficient in this re­gard, says Michael Lai (賴明輝), presi­dent of Waste Management ROC, which operates a commercial waste collection and hauling firm in Taipei. “But outlying counties and municipalities like Taoyuan and Keelung have very bad problems. They have very little disposal capacity for their domestic and commercial waste.” This lack of capacity has given rise to ille­gal hauling and disposal operations. These operators usually dump hazardous and non-hazardous wastes, without discrimi­nation, into rivers, gullies, and illegal landfills, often in the less densely popu­lated areas of central and southern Taiwan, thus seriously adding to Taiwan’s environ­mental degradation.

Due to the lack of available landfill sites, incineration of waste has been iden­tified as the only viable solution for the future. The EPA has outlined plans for twenty-two incinerators which are in­tended to handle up to 70 percent of Taiwan’s solid waste. These incinerators were originally planned as turnkey projects, meaning that the developer would operate the facility for one year before turning it over to a government, or government-con­tracted operator. But any incinerator projects not tendered by mid-1996 will instead be tendered as Build-Operate­-Transfer (BOT) projects, meaning that the developer would be given responsibility for operation of the facility for up to twenty years, together with a greater financial stake in the project.

The construction of new waste dis­posal facilities requires the government first to address the NIMBY problem. “Mod­ern incinerators are like reverse chemical plants,” says Michael Lai. “They burn waste at high temperatures, and remove the chemicals from the gases that result from combustion. Their emissions are ac­tually quite clean. There’s no denying that their presence near certain communities would cause some degree of inconven­ience for residents, but they represent no health hazard.”

Landfill technology has also come a long way from the smells and health hazards formerly associated with such facilities. Modern landfills incorporate advanced liner systems designed to pre­vent water that can percolate through the waste material from seeping into, and con­taminating, soil and ground water. As waste is delivered to the site, it is spread and covered with soil almost immediately. Once it reaches capacity, the landfill is capped using the same liner technology, covered with soil, landscaped to promote proper run-off of rainwater, and seeded to provide an erosion-resistant cover of veg­etation. Golf courses, parks, and other rec­reational facilities can then be safely built on top of the capped landfills. “What has really advanced is landfill management,” explains Swire’s Don Birch. “They used to be very low value items, but landfills and their management have become sophisti­cated and profitable. Firms like ours are prepared to sign contracts that take them through the landfill’s working life, and the management thereafter.”

So just how good are Taiwan’s exist­ing disposal facilities? Robert Barnes heads up the Taiwan office of US-Asia Environmental Partnership (US-AEP), an association of US government agencies and states, businesses, and NGOs, that ex­ists to foster the application of US environ­mental experience and technology. “The technology for disposal where they have incinerators is good,” Barnes says. “They’re trying to procure the best facili­ties. So the problem isn’t so much in the hardware, it’s in the software—in the opera­tion and management of the system of which the incinerator is a part. That’s what needs work.” Taiwan’s landfills, on the other hand, are not up to the best of stand­ards. “The urgency with which many of these landfills were constructed resulted in poor liner installation,” says Michael Lai. “Because of this, there have been numer­ous incidents of soil and ground water contamination. In some cases, liners have not been installed at all.”

As part of the EPA’s strategy to fund the new facilities needed, two noteworthy programs have been implemented. They are frequently summarized as Polluters Pay, and Beneficiaries Pay. Under the Pol­luters Pay principle, companies are en­couraged to reduce the waste they create, and are fined for the pollution they pro­duce. Since 1990, more than 64,000 com­mercial/industrial waste pollution cases have been investigated, US$6.4 million in fines collected, and nearly 160 factories shut down.

But since consumers share the respon­sibility for waste with industry, the EPA also applies the principle of Beneficiaries Pay, meaning that the public must share the cost of maintaining a clean environment. This is achieved by the imposition of an 8 percent tax on every household’s water bill to help fund improvements in the island’s waste management systems.

The value of Taiwan’s waste manage­ment and pollution control market has attracted considerable interest from for­eign waste management companies. “We’ve got over four thousand US envi­ronmental technology and service provid­ers signed up who are ready to respond to Asian inquiries,” says the US-AEP’s Robert Barnes. That comes as no surprise, consid­ering that Taiwan’s combined public and private sector environmental spending into the next decade, from education to pollu­tion control and cleanup in all areas—air, water, and soil—is estimated to be as much as US$34 billion. Because the cost of de­veloping waste management systems is so high, authorities are also looking for con­siderable investment from local industry. “The problem in Taiwan, and throughout Asia for that matter, is that industries have had to bear very little cost for pollution control measures in the past,” says Barnes. “But continued failure to invest in control and cleanup technologies will prove un­tenable in the long term. They are essen­tial to preserving Taiwan’s natural environment and to the competitiveness of its industries. But they’re not cheap.”

Foreign firms that specialize in waste management are already in Taiwan offer­ing assistance with developing, operating, and financing such projects. The govern­ment has responded to this interest from abroad by proposing incentives, such as free land for BOT projects, tax benefits, low interest loans, and low tariffs on equip­ment imports. Some sticking points re­main, including regulatory reforms to allow equitable returns on investment, financing arrangements, and pricing guar­antees. There are also disputes between government officials and the local waste management industry about the extent of foreign participation to be allowed. As Michael Lai explain, “Whatever the market, local companies, even if they lack the expertise, would like to control that mar­ket, and will lobby the government to limit foreign involvement.”

A lack of understanding about the nature of BOT projects is yet another obsta­cle to be overcome. Many foreign com­panies complain that key government agencies fail to recognize the importance of the operational expertise offered by for­eign companies. “People tend to pay too much attention to the equipment at the expense of system management,” says Swire’s Don Birch. “You get a lot of atten­tion to the incinerator, when actually the incinerator is the last step in the process. A lot more has to happen before you get that far. There’s a whole system which has to be established, and that’s not really being addressed here. You don’t just throw the garbage in and burn it, it’s more compli­cated than that. The system must be man­aged properly.”

But despite the international waste management industry’s emphasis on the necessity of operational know-how, equip­ment needs remain foremost in the minds of government officials. “Systems opera­tions are the least of our problems,” says Lin Chun-yi of the Department of Environ­mental Protection. “We need the technology more than anything else. That’s where for­eign investment is most welcome.”

There are also economic incentives for Taiwan to address its current waste management problems. Trade and industry officials are becoming increasingly concerned about a coming international environmental standard for manufacturers, retailers, and the products they make and sell. The standard is called ISO14000, and is being developed by the International Standardization Organization(ISO). ISO operates through independent inspection agencies in countries around the world, such as Underwriters’ Laboratories in the United States, to promote stardards for safety and quality control in a range of industries. ISO standards are not legally binding, but they have been embraced by industries and consumers alike, particularly because ISO certification constitutes an independent affirmation of a company’s high standard of goods and services.

Recent international conferences have highlighted a growing environmen­tal awareness among the world’s consum­ers, and ISO l4000-certified products may soon enjoy strong marketing advantages over those without such certification. To qualify, a company must meet certain standards in the amount of waste or pollu­tion that it produces, and in its ability to dispose of that waste. Given Taiwan’s shortage of proper waste disposal facili­ties, and that many of the existing ones may be required to meet stricter standards than they do at present, there is reason for concern. Furthermore, companies seeking certification must adhere to the “Green Supply Chain” principle, which holds that not only must the company meet ISO l4000 standards, its suppliers must meet them as well.

“Despite cost differences, importers may soon be unable to afford to take the risk of buying products produced by non­-ISO14000 certified firms,” says Birch. “Con­sumers may boycott companies and their products if they find that those products are made by manufacturers that pollute. So it’s not about responsibility, it’s about busi­ness—you’re doing it because you’re in trouble if you don’t. That’s a strong incen­tive.” And, regardless of manufacturers’ efforts to run cleaner operations, the need for proper disposal facilities will have to be addressed. “Taiwan does not yet have a hazardous waste disposal facility, says Michael Lai. “If all Taiwan products were evaluated today, none would receive ISO l4000 certification, because every manu­facturer uses some hazardous material that is discharged in its waste.” But there are those, like Robert Barnes, who are upbeat about the prospects. “If buyers demand it, then I think you’ll find Taiwan companies responding quickly,” he says. “Some may even get certification ahead of many American companies. Taiwan companies are more tied to international trade, and will respond aggressively if their ability to compete is threatened.”

Ultimately, as EPA officials point out, the problem must be faced not solely in terms of Taiwan’s inability to treat waste, but also in its ability to create it; which brings the argument around to where it started, on the stairwells and streets of Taiwan’s conurbations. “Public ignorance is by far the greatest problem,” says DEP’s Lin. “They fail to see that, as a part of the problem, they must also be a part of the solution. If there is to be a solution, we need their help and the help of our indus­tries to reduce the amount of waste that is generated.”