Abstract
Kenya banned the use of asbestos in 2006, given its carcinogenic effects. Consequently, regulatory and institutional guidelines have been established to ensure the safe disposal of hazardous material. Yet, Kenya still uses 10% of its national health allocations to treat asbestos-related infirmities. The goal of this article is to review the policy guidelines for disposal of asbestos and assess its robustness as a measure of socio-environmental risk reduction. The study utilises a systematic review of policy guidelines on asbestos, air, and water quality regulations against their implementation reviewed in Environmental Impact Assessment reports from 2013 to 2021. Studies assessing thermal and chemical treatment processes for asbestos are reviewed to assess the processes involved and acquire information based on efficiency in terms of cost, technological applicability, and minimal environmental effects. The review shows that more risks are inherent from landfilling, which is considered safe in the regulations. Examples include compromised standards of disposal and unforeseen risks arising from geologic activity that may create channels for leaching and other exposure pathways. This review proposes that the policy guidelines should ‘rethink’ and adopt conversion of the substance through processes such as dissolution in acids (and) or thermal conversion processes. The processes guarantee the elimination of the fibres and yield by-products that can be further processed, namely, glass and fertilisers. Additionally, they reduce waste and relieve landfills while optimising land use. Despite the high initial costs, the merits of the process offer significant trade-offs. There is a need for comprehensive data collection, especially on volume, detailed geophysical information, type of Asbestos Containing Material and coherence of policy guidelines. This sets precedence for the adoption of a circular economy which Kenya is determined to embrace. Also, it will present an opportunity for research and innovation that will contribute to a global knowledge base.
Highlights
The general term asbestos refers to typical fibrous minerals of two configurations: amphibole, a naturally occurring mineral with long thin fibres and chrysotile which is derived from serpentine minerals (Arce et al, 2017; Kim et al, 2015; Li et al, 2014; Shin et al, 2016; Zhang et al, 2016)
Thermal conversion is heavily debatable as an option for the circular economy because it eliminates nutrients or raw materials from the loop; this study argues that the risks linked with handling ACM are far too high to be transferred through generations producing useful alternative by-products such as glass, fertilisers, fillers for other industries, should be a significant factor
This study has reviewed and explored two common practices of managing asbestos waste; vitrification and dissolution in acids, especially with an emphasis on reuse and recycle processes
Summary
The general term asbestos refers to typical fibrous minerals of two configurations: amphibole, a naturally occurring mineral with long thin fibres (actinolite, amosite, anthophyllite, crocidolite and tremolite) and chrysotile which is derived from serpentine minerals (Arce et al, 2017; Kim et al, 2015; Li et al, 2014; Shin et al, 2016; Zhang et al, 2016). The substance, which is known for its resilience to fire, degradation and heat was adopted in the 1960s and 1970s with extensive use as housing roofs, paints, and ceilings. The Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (2017) has mapped asbestos roofs in the country which is 197,217 sheets, with Nairobi having 15% which is the highest nationally. This inventory is a good step towards addressing the risk and mainly the handling and disposal of these harmful products
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
