Disasters can create the equivalent of 20 years of waste in only a few days. Disaster waste can have direct impacts on public health and safety, and on the environment. The management of such waste has a great direct cost to society in terms of labor, equipment, processing, transport and disposal. Disaster waste management also has indirect costs, in the sense that slow management can slow down a recovery, greatly affecting the ability of commerce and industry to re-start. In addition, a disaster can lead to the disruption of normal solid waste management systems, or result in inappropriate management that leads to expensive environmental remediation. Finally, there are social impacts implicit in disaster waste management decisions because of psychological impact we expect when waste is not cleared quickly or is cleared too quickly. The paper gives an overview of the challenge of disaster waste management, examining issues of waste quantity and composition; waste treatment; environmental, economic, and social impacts; health and safety matters; and planning. Christchurch, New Zealand, and the broader region of Canterbury were impacted during this research by a series of shallow earthquakes. This has led to the largest natural disaster emergency in New Zealand’s history, and the management of approximately 8 million tons of building and infrastructure debris has become a major issue. The paper provides an overview of the status of disaster waste management in Christchurch as a case study. A key conclusion is the vital role of planning in effective disaster waste management. In spite of the frequency of disasters, in most countries the ratio of time spent on planning for disaster waste management to the time spent on normal waste management is extremely low. Disaster waste management also requires improved education or training of those involved in response efforts. All solid waste professionals have a role to play to respond to the challenges of disaster waste management.
A story submitted by Aaron Hartle to the QuakeStories website.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 27 February 2011 entitled, "Airborne Invasion".
A story submitted by Peter Low to the QuakeStories website.
A photograph of a volunteer from the Wellington Emergency Management Office standing with a minister from the International Disaster Relief Team.
A story submitted by Elizabeth to the QuakeStories website.
A photograph of a minister from the International Disaster Relief Team giving a volunteer from the Wellington Emergency Management Office a massage.
A photograph of a minister from the International Disaster Relief Team giving a volunteer from the Wellington Emergency Management Office a massage.
A photograph of a minister from the International Disaster Relief Team giving a volunteer from the Wellington Emergency Management Office a massage.
A photograph of a minister from the International Disaster Relief Team giving a volunteer from the Wellington Emergency Management Office a massage.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 27 February 2011 entitled, "Avon Adaptation".
A photograph of a minister from the International Disaster Relief Team giving a massage at a temporary emergency management centre set up after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A photograph of a minister from the International Disaster Relief Team giving a massage at a temporary emergency management centre set up after the 22 February 2011 earthquake.
A story submitted by Dee Dawson to the QuakeStories website.
A story submitted by Anonymous to the QuakeStories website.
A story submitted by Ali to the QuakeStories website.
A photograph of crates of supplies outside the USAID tent in Latimer Square. In the background members of the USAID Disaster Assistance Response Team have congregated.
Disaster recovery is significantly affected by funding availability. The timeliness and quality of recovery activities are not only impacted by the extent of the funding but also the mechanisms with which funding is prioritised, allocated and delivered. This research addresses the impact of funding mechanisms on the effectiveness and efficiency of post-disaster demolition and debris management programmes. A qualitative assessment of the impacts on recovery of different funding sources and mechanisms was carried out, using the 2010 Canterbury Earthquake as well as other recent international events as case studies. The impacts assessed include: timeliness, completeness, environmental, economic and social impacts. Of the case studies investigated, the Canterbury Earthquake was the only disaster response to rely solely on a privatised approach to insurance for debris management. Due to the low level of resident displacement and low level of hazard in the waste, this was a satisfactory approach, though not ideal. This approach has led to greater organisational complexity and delays. For many other events, the potential community wide impacts caused by the prolonged presence of disaster debris means that publicly funded and centrally facilitated programmes appear to be the most common and effective method of managing disaster waste.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 27 February 2011 entitled, "Day 6, 3pm - inside the Christchurch cordon".
A story submitted by Elizabeth to the QuakeStories website.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 6 March 2011 entitled, "Cordon Confusion".
A story submitted by Peter Seager to the QuakeStories website.
A story submitted by Jennifer to the QuakeStories website.
The timeliness and quality of recovery activities are impacted by the organisation and human resourcing of the physical works. This research addresses the suitability of different resourcing strategies on post-disaster demolition and debris management programmes. This qualitative analysis primarily draws on five international case studies including 2010 Canterbury earthquake, 2009 L’Aquila earthquake, 2009 Samoan Tsunami, 2009 Victorian Bushfires and 2005 Hurricane Katrina. The implementation strategies are divided into two categories: collectively and individually facilitated works. The impacts of the implementation strategies chosen are assessed for all disaster waste management activities including demolition, waste collection, transportation, treatment and waste disposal. The impacts assessed include: timeliness, completeness of projects; and environmental, economic and social impacts. Generally, the case studies demonstrate that detritus waste removal and debris from major repair work is managed at an individual property level. Debris collection, demolition and disposal are generally and most effectively carried out as a collective activity. However, implementation strategies are affected by contextual factors (such as funding and legal constraints) and the nature of the disaster waste (degree of hazardous waste, geographical spread of waste etc.) and need to be designed accordingly. Community involvement in recovery activities such as demolition and debris removal is shown to contribute positively to psychosocial recovery.
A story submitted by Rosie Belton to the QuakeStories website.
A story submitted by Lynette Evans to the QuakeStories website.
A story submitted by Tracy to the QuakeStories website.
An entry from Ruth Gardner's blog for 4 March 2011 entitled, "Day 11, 7am - inside the Christchurch cordon".
The "Lyttelton Review" newsletter for 29 August 2011, produced by the Lyttelton Harbour Information Centre.
An entry from Roz Johnson's blog for 21 December 2011 entitled, "Loving Green".