To protect the only planet capable of supporting human life without special equipment, it is necessary to adapt our technology and business processes to the principles of sustainability.

One of the technologies that need to be optimized from an environmental standpoint is blockchain. Its impact on the environment so far has been significant, and not in the best way. Fortunately, there are already initiatives trying to make this industry more sustainable.

Let’s see what they are and how they can help protect the environment.

The Problem of Blockchain and Sustainability

The main problem with blockchain technology is that it consumes a lot of energy. The fact is that the more popular cryptocurrencies become and the higher their capitalization grows, the more energy they consume as well.

Today, Bitcoin alone consumes as much electricity as smaller countries. The reason for that lies in the consensus protocol some most used blockchain frameworks rely on — Proof of Work.

Proof of Work is a consensus algorithm that allows blockchain nodes to reach a consensus. Its main features are as follows:

• A block can be added to the chain only if the previously generated cryptographic puzzle is solved;
• To solve the puzzle, a node needs to spend computational power;
• The more computational power the node spends, the more likely it is to find the solution to the puzzle first and add a new block to the chain.

As you can see, this algorithm requires quite a lot of energy, which generates a lot of greenhouse gasses and other pollutants. According to recent estimates, the emission of greenhouse gasses from Bitcoin mining alone is comparable to that of countries like New Zealand!

However, as mentioned above, this negative impact on the environment can be rectified by adopting changes in technology. One of the most promising approaches here is using blockchain frameworks based on Proof of Stake instead of Proof of Work.

Proof of Stake

Proof of Stake (PoS) is a popular alternative to Proof of Work (PoW) in blockchain technology. It has gained popularity in recent years due to its ability to provide a more sustainable and environmentally friendly solution to blockchain validation while maintaining security and decentralization.

Instead of relying on the intense computational power of miners to validate transactions, PoS operates on the principle of “staking.”

Essentially, participants in the network are required to hold a certain amount of the cryptocurrency to be eligible to validate transactions. The more cryptocurrency held, the higher the chances of being chosen to validate the next block.

This solution not only reduces the energy consumption associated with PoW but also encourages long-term investment in cryptocurrency.

Switch to Renewables

The use of renewable energy is another way to make blockchain more sustainable. The fact is that if the energy used by miners is derived from renewable sources, the impact of blockchain on the environment will be minimal.

Countries could drive the effort, facilitating a switch from fossil fuel plants to solar, wind, and nuclear power — non-emissive energy sources.

In addition, individuals and organizations themselves could try to offset their blockchain-related carbon footprint by investing in renewable energy sources. To illustrate the point, buildings can be covered with solar panels, and the electricity produced could be used to power mining rigs. Doing so would offset the carbon footprint and reduce energy costs.

Building a solar or wind farm to power a mining operation might seem like a costly investment, but in the long run, it would pay off more than most can imagine.

Optimization of Equipment

Another way to make the blockchain more sustainable is to optimize equipment efficiency. Miners can do it in several ways:

• Using specialized hardware for mining, which is more energy-efficient;
• Minimizing heat loss by using proper cooling methods;
• Using equipment that can be upgraded to the latest and most efficient models as they become available.

These methods will not only help reduce energy consumption but also reduce costs. Plus, they are relatively easy to implement, making them an attractive option for miners who want to make their rigs greener.

Improved Regulatory Efforts

Regulatory efforts are also crucial in making blockchain more sustainable. Many countries are still in the process of developing legislation on cryptocurrencies and blockchain.

In most cases, these regulations do not take into account the environmental impact of this technology. As a result, in many places, miners can operate without any restrictions.

Improving regulatory efforts will help ensure that miners are required to follow certain environmental standards. For example, they could be required to use energy-efficient equipment or switch to renewable energy sources. Alternatively, the government could establish limits on the total energy consumption of mining operations.

These types of regulations would help make the blockchain more sustainable while still allowing it to develop and grow.

Final Thoughts

The blockchain industry is still in its early stages of development. Yet, even at this stage, it significantly impacts the environment. The main reason for this is the fact that blockchain technology consumes a lot of energy.

Fortunately, there are ways to make this industry more sustainable.

One of the most promising approaches is the use of blockchain frameworks that are based on Proof of Stake instead of Proof of Work. The use of renewable energy and the optimization of equipment efficiency can also reduce the environmental impact of blockchain. Finally, improved regulatory efforts will help ensure that miners are required to follow certain environmental standards.

Ultimately, these efforts can make the blockchain more sustainable and reduce its environmental impact.

Recommended Reading: Eco-friendly Hosting Solutions for Bitcoin Mining

The post Saving the Planet: How to Make Blockchain More Environmentally Friendly? first appeared on BioEnergy Consult.

Major Hurdles

The general perception towards waste is that of indifference and apathy. Waste is treated as ‘waste’ rather than as a ‘resource’. There is an urgent need to increase public awareness about environmental issues, waste management practices and sustainable living. Public participation in community-level waste management initiatives is lackluster mainly due to low level of environmental awareness and public education. Unfortunately none of the countries in the region have an effective source-segregation mechanism.

Waste management in Middle East is bogged down by deficiencies in waste management legislation and poor planning. Many countries lack legislative framework and regulations to deal with wastes. Insufficient funds, absence of strategic waste management plans, lack of coordination among stakeholders, shortage of skilled manpower and deficiencies in technical and operational decision-making are some of the hurdles experienced in implementing an integrated waste management strategy in the region. In many countries waste management is the sole prerogative of state-owned companies and municipalities which discourage participation of private companies and entrepreneurs.

Due to lack of garbage collection and disposal facilities, dumping of waste in open spaces, deserts and water bodies is a common sight across the region. Another critical issue is lack of awareness and public apathy towards waste reduction, source segregation and waste management.

A sustainable waste management system demands high degree of public participation, effective laws, sufficient funds and modern waste management practices/technologies. The region can hope to improve waste management scenario by implementing source-segregation, encouraging private sector participation, deploying recycling and waste-to-energy systems, and devising a strong legislative and institutional framework.

The Way Forward

In recent year, several countries, like Qatar, UAE and Oman, have established ambitious solid waste management projects but their efficacy is yet to be ascertained. On the whole, Middle East countries are slowly, but steadily, gearing up to meet the challenge posed by waste management by investing heavily in such projects, sourcing new technologies and raising public awareness.

However the pace of progress is not matched by the increasing amount of waste generated across the region. Sustainable waste management is a big challenge for policy-makers, urban planners and other stake-holders, and immediate steps are needed to tackle mountains of wastes accumulating in cities throughout the Middle East.

The post Waste Management Challenges in Middle East first appeared on BioEnergy Consult.

Up to 80% of ocean debris originates from land based sources, including beach litter, litter transported by rivers, and discharges of untreated municipal sewage, while ocean based sources (merchant shipping, ferries, cruise liners, fishing and military vessels) account for the remainder. Whilst typically this may be only 20% of marine litter, in areas of high shipping activity such as the North Sea it rises closer to 40%.

Wastes from commercial vessels seems like an area that could be effectively tackled with regulation. However, it is difficult for individual nations or regions to take action when ships operate in international waters and the debris in our oceans is constantly on the move.

So how is it addressed through international legislation?

Law of the Seas

In fact, a good many laws are already in place. The key piece of legislation preventing ‘the disposal of garbage at sea’ is Annex V of the International Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Ships (MARPOL). Amongst the numerous other relevant laws are the London Convention and Protocol, the Basel Convention, UNCLOS, and the Convention on Biological Diversity.

In addition, many more laws exist at regional and national levels. In the EU, laws directly related to marine debris include the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Directive on Port Reception Facilities. Laws indirectly related to marine debris include the Common Fisheries Policy, the Water Framework Directive, the Waste Framework Directive, the Habitats Directive…. The list goes on.

Fathoming the Legislation

Despite the profusion of legislation, the scale of the current and potential problems caused by marine debris, it is clear that implementation and enforcement is lagging behind. Why so?

Ratification

As yet, not all coastal or flag states have ratified international instruments such as MARPOL Annex V. This means that ships registered with a non-ratified state under a‘flag of convenience’ may legally continue to discharge garbage in international waters. However, even if the current suite of international legislation was universally ratified, this would serve to expose the remaining gaps in the framework.

Discharge provisions

MARPOL Annex V includes specific requirements regarding the discharge of different types of waste and location of discharges. For instance, ground food waste can be discharged up to 3 nautical miles from land, but if it is not ground it may only be discharged at a distance of 12 nautical miles or more. Although the discharge of ‘all other garbage including plastics’ is prohibited, compliance relies upon good waste management practices on board vessels.

If waste streams are contaminated, this may result in plastics and other debris being discharged into the sea. The current approach may have been developed to accommodate shipping activity, but in practice it is somewhat confusing and it would perhaps make more sense to issue a blanket ban on discharges.

Scope

Another gap within MARPOL Annex V is the scope of the requirements for ‘garbage management plans’ and ‘garbage record books’. Vessels of 100 gross tonnes or more are required to have a garbage management plan, while vessels of 400 gross tonnes or more are required to have a garbage record book. Smaller vessels are not obliged to comply with the requirements.

Less than 1% of vessels in the world fishing fleet have a gross tonnage of over 100 tonnes, the majority has no obligation to implement and maintain a plan or book; with no planning or record keeping, the risk of illegal disposal is increased. Small fishing vessels may not be considered ‘commercial’ shipping vessels at all – thereby avoiding legislation – but they still contribute towards the problem of marine debris. Most notably, abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear has a considerable impact on marine species through ‘ghost fishing’.

Port waste reception facilities

MARPOL Annex V requires the government of each ratified nation to provide facilities at ports for the reception of ship generated residues and garbage that cannot be discharged into the sea. The facilities must be adequate to meet the needs of ships using the port, without causing undue delay to ships. However, MARPOL does not prescribe any set standards or provide for certification. The term ‘adequate’ is instead defined in a qualitative (rather than quantitative) manner in Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) resolution 83 (44).

Furthermore, MARPOL does not set any requirements regarding how waste delivered to port reception facilities should be managed. Only the non-mandatory MEPC resolution 83 (44) requires that facilities should allow for the ultimate disposal of ships’ wastes to take place in an environmentally appropriate way.

Cruise ships

Cruise ships operate in every ocean worldwide, often in pristine coastal waters and sensitive marine ecosystems. Operators provide amenities to their passengers similar to those of luxury resort hotels, generating up to 14 tonnes of waste per day. Worldwide, the cruise industry has experienced a compound annual passenger growth rate of 7% since 1990, and the number of passengers carried is expected to increase from approximately 21 million in 2013 to 23.7 million in 2017.

The majority of current legislation on pollution and ship waste was developed prior to the rapid growth of the cruise market; as a consequence, there is no international legislation addressing the particular issues surrounding pollution and waste management on these vessels.

Although there is not yet data to support this, intuitively the amount of waste produced by ships would be linked to the number of people on board, rather than the vessel’s gross tonnage (which determines whether MARPOL rules apply). If the industry grows as forecasted, cruise ships may be responsible for a significant proportion of waste generated by ships, particularly if unmanned are the future.

To address this, onboard waste management systems that implement zero disposal of solid waste at sea are needed for cruise ships, together with a requirement that they only dispose of their waste at ports with reception facilities adequate to handle the type and volume of waste produced.

Taking the Helm

Where international and regional legislation is found lacking a number of voluntary mechanisms have been devised, indicating an appetite to improve the current waste disposal practices of the shipping industry.

• The indirect fee system aims to remove the disincentive for ships to dispose of waste at port rather than at sea by including the cost of waste disposal services in the port fees paid by visiting ships, irrespective of whether ships use the facilities
• The Clean Shipping Index is an easy to use, transparent tool which can be used by cargo owners to evaluate the environmental performance of their sea transport providers. The information is entered on a ship-by-ship basis but is also added to a total carrier fleet score for an overall ranking. Questions on waste relate to garbage handling and crew awareness, and scores can only be obtained for measures that go beyond existing regulations.
• One commercial container operator (Matson Navigation) has introduced a zero solid waste discharge policy. The ‘greentainer’ programme uses containers specifically designed for storing solid waste. Since 1994, this programme has prevented over 10,000 tonnes of garbage being disposed of at sea.

Currently, international legislation does not properly support a closed loop system for waste management onboard ships. Despite legislative progress and improvements in practice, the monitoring of waste from shipping remains problematic. ‘Policing the seas’ to verify what a ship discharges and where, and whether this follows recommended best practice, remains one of the most challenging aspects of waste management practice at sea, but critical to making the legal framework effective.

The United Nations Environment Programme neatly summarised the issue in 2005:“… marine litter is not a problem which can be solved only by means of legislation, law enforcement and technical solutions. It is a social problem which requires efforts to change behaviours, attitudes, management approaches and multi-sectoral involvement.” 

The limitations of international legislation governing the case of marine litter disposed of at sea do need to be addressed; but unless legislation is accompanied by environmental education for seafarers, and improved monitoring, our attempts to tackle this source of marine litter will remain all at sea.

Note: The article has been republished with the permission of our collaborative partner Isonomia. The original version of the article can be found at this link.

The post The Problem of Shipping Wastes first appeared on BioEnergy Consult.