Hazardous waste minimization practices in Tennessee

The minimization of hazardous waste generation as well as the proper treatment and disposal of generated waste has great importance for the protection of present and future human health and the environment. The purpose of this study was to identify the extent of waste minimization practices carried out by Tennessee waste generators since September 1985 and to determine the importance of waste minimization factors as perceived by Tennessee waste generators. This was accomplished methodologically through survey research of large Tennessee waste generators. During the period between August 12, 1987, and October 7, 1987, two mailings and telephone reminders produced a 68.4% response rate from 266 waste generators. The population was categorized in three stratified groupings, based on the quantity of hazardous waste produced: Group One, produced more than 1 million kg per year; Group Two, produced between 100,000 and 1 million kg per year; and Group Three, produced less than 100,000 kg per year but more than 1,000 kg per year.

Data analyses included nonparametric statistical analysis of ordinal level data. Three nonparametric tests were employed: Kruskal-Wallis One-Way Analysis of Variance, Kendall's Coefficient of Concordance, and Somers' d test.

Overall, Tennessee generators, differentiated by the quantity of waste generated, did not differ in their survey responses. However, on individual questions or statements there were some differences. In order to minimize waste, Tennessee generators claimed considerable involvement in process equipment or technology change, company awareness, and "housekeeping" changes. Changes involving the final products were the least applicable or least desirable area for waste minimization. Tennessee generators demonstrated positive response to "voluntary" waste minimization regulations and showed concern for the environment as well. In terms of economics, although cost was an important issue to waste generators, they indicated willingness to adopt some waste minimization practices, even if these were not cost effective. Waste generators consider their present efforts in waste minimization "moderate" relative to their overall operations. Hence, there is still room for additional waste minimization.