COVID-19 pandemic: Solid waste and environmental impacts in Brazil

Abstract

The World Health Organization has recently declared South America the new epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic, as Brazil has become one of the most affected countries. Besides public health and economic impacts, social isolation has also caused indirect environmental effects. The aim of this study was to assess environmental impacts caused by shifts on solid waste production and management due to the COVID-19 pandemic in Brazil. We have analyzed data from 30 cities, representing a population of more than 53.8 million people (25.4% of the Brazilian population). Unexpectedly, solid waste production in the main cities in Brazil has decreased during the social isolation period, possibly because of reduced activity in commercial areas. The latest data on solid waste in Brazil have revealed that more than 35% of medical waste has not been treated properly. Furthermore, improper disposal of facemasks has been reported in several cities and may increase the risk for COVID-19 spread. The suspension of recycling programs has hindered natural resources from being saved, with emphasis on 24,076 MWh of electric power and 185,929 m 3 of potable water – respectively enough to supply 152,475 households and 40,010 people, over a month. Furthermore, total sale price for recyclable materials during the suspension of recycling programs reaches more than 781 thousand dollars, being these materials disposed in landfills – demanding an extra volume of 19,000 m 3 – reducing landfill lifespan, and hence causing a double loss: economic and environmental.

More Is Not Enough: A Deeper Understanding of the COVID-19 Impacts on Healthcare, Energy and Environment Is Crucial

“…Figure 3 shows the spatial difference of the change rate of solid waste generation caused by COVID-19. Compared to medical waste and plastic waste, household waste has presented more complicated changes, e.g., a 28% reduction in Milan, Italy, and a 17% fall in Catalonia, Spain [ 116 ], a 25% reduction in Barcelona, Spain [ 120 ], a 15% fall in Campinas-SP, Brazil [ 121 ], a 23% decrease in Shanghai, China [ 122 ], and a 30% reduction in major cities of China [ 89 ].…”

“…On the one hand, the treatment capacity in some densely populated cities would be the limitations for those sharply increased medical waste [ 89 ]. For example, over 35% of medical waste was not treated properly in Brazil [ 121 ]. Mismanagement of excess waste could result in increased environmental pollution [ 131 ] and even health risks due to medical waste pollution.…”

“…Recycling programmes might be hindered by several reasons, such as the resource shortage and the high risk of manual waste segregation during pandemics. For example, the government authority recommended the suspension of such programmes in Brazil due to the potentially high risks in recycling centres [ 121 ]. The medium- or long-term effects of the suspension of recycling programmes deserve concerns [ 132 ].…”

“…The lesson learned from the COVID-19 could (i) boost the automation-enhanced waste segregation using intelligent robotics [ 135 ], and AI technologies [ 136 ] and (ii) promote the sorting at the source [ 134 ] rather than at the end. During the COVID-19 pandemic, illegal waste dumping, including the face masks, was broadly observed in Brazil [ 121 ], the UK [ 137 ] and Romania [ 138 ]. For example, a 300% rise in illegal waste disposal was observed during the lockdown in the UK [ 137 ], and a 70% increase was reported in Melbourne, Australia in April 2020 [ 126 ].…”

“Everything continued as normal”: What happened to Africa’s wave of Covid-19 waste?

“…( Ikiz et al, 2021 , Nemo, 2020 , Ragazzi et al, 2020 , Rosengren and Crunden, 2020 , You et al, 2020 ), the inability for specialised disposal services to keep up the influx of contaminated wastes (cf. ( Kulkarni and Anantharama, 2020 , Lee, 2020 , Nemo, 2020 , Urban and Nakada, 2021 ), increases in waste volumes and changes in household and commercial waste characteristics, including the use and disposal of single-use plastic products (cf. ( Adyel, 2020 , Doheny, 2020 , Forrest, 2020 , Klemeš et al, 2020 , Schuman, 2020 , Sharma et al, 2020 , Vanapalli et al, 2021 ), as well as the growing environmental impact of discarded personal protective equipment (PPE), including the ubiquitous disposable facemask (cf.…”