Incineration Technology for Biohazard Waste Management

Discuss about the Psychological and Behavioral Considerations.

As discussed in portfolio 2, there are numerous other alternative solutions to the problems of the management of hazard biowastes. These different alternative solutions to the biohazard waste management process which are classified as follows:

The incineration is the technology which is used for providing high temperature to the waste for converting the inert material to the gaseous form. The electrical supply helps in managing the high power and temperature of the system. This process is effective for managing the type of biohazard related to multiple hearth, kiln, and type of air (Boroughs, 2012, p.114). The combustion chambers are installed for managing the adequate temperature for the handling of the waste. This technology has been under harsh critics from the environmental specialists who claim that there is more harm attached to the technology despite the advantages that come with it. Among such advantages, they argue include negative impacts to the human health as well as on the environment.

On the aspect of human health, the high temperatures of combustion in the incineration process generate toxic substance at different stage including the thermal technologies the created pollutant should be trapped would remain in the filter and ash thereby calling for the need of special landfill in order to be deposited.  In the context of human health concerns, environmental specialists and other stakeholders have established that systems used for waste incineration generate a wide range of pollutants that are hazardous to the human health. Such systems have been found to be costly and do not remove or sufficiently control the poisonous emissions from the sophisticated incineration process (Fortino, 2014, p.320). Generation of poisonous substances such as dioxins, acid gases as well as toxic metals has also been observed even in the newest incinerators.

This technology is effective for managing the biohazard related to thermal and biological processes. The application of thermal and biological treatment on the waste helps in destroying the pathogens attached to the contaminated biohazard waste accumulated from the hospital and medical services. Nonincineration processes tend to be a counter to the use of incineration technologies and to some extent may be used as a better alternative to the study. It addresses the various concerns and drawbacks of the use of incinerator technologies including the costly nature of incinerators, the potential harm of the incineration ash as well as the toxic air pollutants that are being released by the incinerators to the environment (Jones, 2014, p.230). Non-incineration process and technologies are classified into four general groups: chemical processes, biological processes, irradiate processes and low heat thermal processes. Most of the non-incineration processes applicable make use of chemical processes and low heat thermal processes.

Non-Incineration Processes for Biohazard Waste Management

This technology works on the principle of generating high-frequency wave to eliminate the pathogens which are associated with the biological waste. The vibration of the particles helps in analyzing the frequency of the waves which are required to remove the pathogen from the contaminated biological waste. The heating by applying high waves helps in eliminating the virus, bacteria, and pathogen from the accumulated waste in the surrounding (Boroughs, 2012, p.512).

Other methods are briefly discussed as below with each of the methods defined and the extent of an application identified:

The addition of chemical integrator is an effective process for managing the pathogens associated with the biohazard waste accumulated from the medical services and hospitals center. The hydrochloride solution is the effective chemical integrator for managing the contamination of the biohazard.

This is the effective techniques of managing the waste accumulated from different sources at micro and macro level. It is the eco-friendly technology for converting biodegradable into productive by-products through the process of recycling. This process is effective for managing the gases released in the decomposition of the biowaste which are carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and the compounds of hydrocarbon. The reliability of the process can be improved by matching the amount of temperature required for developing the effective system for the complete process of waste handling and management system. 1200-degree centigrade temperature is supplied to the plasma pyrolysis process for the burning of gases related to carbon monoxide, hydrogen, and the compounds of hydrocarbon (Millett, 2012, p.202).

The choice on any of the above described alternative solutions to the management of biohazard waste accumulated from the medical services and hospital centers is influenced by a few factors. These factors are meant to ensure that the chosen alternative is good in terms of promoting human health and sustainability in their application. For this reason, the selection methodology of the alternatives is pegged o human health concerns and environmental conservation or sustainability (Rapp, 2012, p.244). The methods chosen should be such that it has the least impact on the water, air, and soils. The aim of any of the alternatives is to assist with the removal of biohazard waste accumulated from the medical services and hospitals. Wastes are removed and managed due to their negative impacts on the environment. Using an alternative that has significant negative impacts on the environment will thus not prove t be of significant benefit to the environment itself for which concern is given.

Factors Influencing the Selection of the Appropriate Technology

On the other hand, human health is the greatest concern in any processes that are being undertaken and thus all the activities should be geared towards promoting the safety of the humans which include the users of the alternative solutions as well as the third parties. Human health concerns are addressed through choosing an alternative that would generate least toxic substances including gases. The alternative chosen should be such that it fosters healthy living of people by creating an environment that is least polluted. Cost is yet another consideration as a selection methodology (Mihailidis, 2011, p.278). As a result of the rise in the requirements every day, cost implications of an alternative solution must be taken into account to ensure that there is value for money in the strategy adopted. This is possible after considering the cost of running the waste management system on the various alternatives, bearing in mind the conditions of their operations.

The initial choice on the appropriate technology to be used in the management of the non-biodegradable bio waste of in hospitals from the available range of alternatives is very important when it comes to achieving a successful operation of the system (Kuznetsova, 2014, p.256). Chances are that the technology may fail to function or may function inadequately should inappropriate choices be made at the onset. In as much as this is normally to the knowledge of many, it is common practice that people usually underestimate the power of making a choice based on numerous available alternative and considerations that need to be taken into consideration.

The waste management alternatives available may not be appropriate in all the places and with all the users owing to a number of factors. This raises the need to come up with the considerations that when given attention will; ensure that the most appropriate choice is made. There are three selection stages that are involved in the considerations: objectives, analysis, and output. The objective stage identifies the purpose of non-biodegradable bio-waste management in hospitals and other health facilities (Purnendu, 2013, p.315). The stage attempts to offer responses to these questions what achievement is being attempted and why. Other questions that this objective will address include if the objective is achievable as well as identifying if the attempted achievement is the main problem. More often than not, numerous people underestimate this stage. The priority in this project should be low-cost, sustainable and effective waste management system of non-biodegradable bio wastes.

Considerations for Selecting Biohazard Waste Management Technology

The second stage is about the limitations of the proposed development. This is only a possibility of taking a lot at the particularities of each of the individual cases. In most cases, physical constraints among the availability of land and water resources are normally considered. It is important to consider all the fundamental factors that have the potential to significantly contribute to the failure or success of the scheme to be addressed in an elaborate manner. For the purposes of analysis, the issues are classified into SHTEFIE criteria, criteria that were developed by Richard Franceys and Margaret among other at WEDC as a tool to aid in the analysis of the programs of development (Light, 2011, p.121).

S-Social

H-Health

T-Technological

E-Economic

F-Financial

I-Institutional

E-Environmental

Using these groupings it is possible to come up with a checklist of factors that may need to be considered.

Th third stage is the output stage which involves evaluation of the output upon addressing all the relevant issues. For the case of non-biodegradable bio waste management, there will be two main outputs the first one being the technological option itself. These are determined by the method that has been used in the implementation and regulation of the very technology- in most cases the waste management quality standard. Unrealistic and unattainable standards are normally laid down with the highly detrimental effect of motivating people to invest in technologies that best fit the community. The options and the standards or targets must be considered jointly only from which an appropriate choice on a technology may be made (Boroughs, 2012, p.177).

Among the social factors that may affect the implementation of non-biodegradable bio waste management, include public desires and preferences, aesthetic considerations, cultural and religious aspects, levels of skills and expertise, influence on the ability to maintain and operate. In the cultural aspect, all the human societies across the globe exhibit culture systems and in each and every human society there are numerous networks of attitude and values as well as customs and patterns of behavior that ware used in defining the way o the life alongside the world in which people act, solve problem and decides among other activities (Allen, 2013, p.132). The choice of the non-biodegradable bio waste management alternative will be influenced by these patterns of life as portrayed in a specific culture in which the technology is to be introduced.

In order to make it a success, the technology should be chosen in such a way that it is in harmony with this cultural practice and beliefs otherwise it will face rejection from the hospital users rendering it a meaningless project. The level of skills and the ability to maintain and operate a waste management system go hand in hand and is a factor of the availability of skilled manpower in the location on to which the alternative is to be installed. While the management may consider hiring the skills and professionalism, it is a good thing that there a staff within the premises who are able to manage the non-biodegradable bio waste management system. This will ensure there is the efficient and effective operation of the system through continuous operation. Availability of the skills is also important in ensuring that any problems or challenges that arise in the process of operation of the system are addressed as soon as possible in such a way that they do not completely paralyze the operations (Kuznetsova, 2014, p.214).

SHTEFIE Criteria for Addressing Biohazard Waste Management Challenges

Public preferences are greatly influenced by the religious and cultural beliefs of the people who are intending to use the technology as desires are controlled by the patterns of behavior as deemed moral and acceptable by a human society. Choosing on a non-biodegradable bio waste management system that is preferred by the intended users will aid in motivating the users in working with the system and result in increased productivity from the system. On the other hand, a system in which the intended users feel excluded risk abandonment and neglect leading to absolute failure in meeting the intended missions and objectives of installation and implementation of the system (Madjid, 2014, p.253).

In a nutshell, social considerations serve to bring into the system the users. Through the various social factors, a choice can be made on the seems that will ensure all the users feel included and their preferences, as well as beliefs, are accounted for in the design of the non-biodegradable bio waste management system. As such, they will be motivated to work with the system and aid the hospital and other healthcare centers in achieving effective management of non-biodegradable bio wastes.

The broader environmental issues form an integral aspect of the choice of a technology that is to be used in the waste management system. Coming up with each of the alternative solutions of the technologies makes use of resources inclusive of materials that are used in the technology and the energy that is required to make the technology and operate it. A number of factors, therefore, need to be taken into account so as to reduce the negative impacts on the environment. Such factors include the life of the solution or technology, the material that is used in making the technology as well as the disposal (Anderson, 2009, p.145). The disposal revolves around what happens to the product as soon as its life comes to an end.

With regard to the material of the technology used, the choice of the technology should be such that it adopts a solution which reduces the use of materials as much an s possible. In the case where the solution to be chosen has electrical components which are dependent on what needs to be done by the circuit, the designer of the technology has the power to choose on the materials that he can use as the enclosure of the system. One of the ways of achieving environmental sustainability and thus environmental consideration is through the use if the minimal material in the enclosure. This means when making a choice on an alternative solution, a technology that has least material enclosure partly meets the environmental standards and thus stands an upper hand. This would be being interrogative on the materials that are required or whether it is possible to make the enclosure smaller or thinner in terms of shape and still it is able to perform the same task. It may also call for going for an alternative material that has better properties so that not a lot of the material is required (Brian, 2016, p.162).

The use of renewable resources is yet another way of achieving environmentally sustainable technology that requires significant attention. On this, some materials are found to have less impact on the environment as compared to others.  A renewable resource is one that is replaceable naturally in quite a short span of time. An example is the use of wood that is derived from forests is comparatively renewable as it is possible to regrow trees within a few years. On the other hand, materials such as plastics are made from oil which is a non-renewable resource. This means that just a specific amount of oil is available and once used it cannot be replaced. The use of nonrenewable source translates to their extinction with time. With regard to choosing a non-biodegradable bio waste management system, the choice could be made in such a way that the chosen technology has some aspect of renewability in it. This is achievable by choosing a technology that utilizes renewable energy in its operation. Renewable energy is clean and environmentally friendly besides reducing the operating costs of running the technology as there will be a reduction in the expenses (Purnendu, 2013, p.302).

Another consideration in line with environmental concerns when making a choice of a material is the by-products. Numerous manufacturing processes generate different types of wastes as the by-products. At the time, such wastes may include toxic substances that may be detrimental to the environment and the people. This makes it important therefore to ensure that the technology solution to the non-biodegradable bio waste management system is chosen in such a way that consideration is given to how the technology system has been made and any by-products that may be generated by the processes (Services, 2012, p.218).

In terms of the life of the technology, in most cases, the design of technology is made with anticipating that it will last for long before they can become non-operational, worn out and dumped. How long the technology or solution is chosen will last informs an integral aspect of environmental consideration. A solution with a longer lifespan will ensure that there are just but a few materials that are required for replacements of the various components of the system. In order to pick on a solution with a longer lifespan, consideration should be on the materials that have better properties for example by adopting stronger materials or material that are able to resist corrosion (Brian, 2016, p.201).

Still, another way of ensuring that an environmentally sustainable solution is settled on is through picking on a solution whose design allows an extension of the lifespan through maintenance. Maintenance basically means any undertaking that increases the life of a product or technology and may include anything other than repair of worn out parts to the replacement of dead batteries. A solution that is designed in a manner that permits maintenance is one that is inclusive of features that allow easy replacement of parts (Madjid, 2014, p.148). On the other hand, the solution may be a series of standardized modules such that if anything goes working in the system, only the module that is affected is to be removed or repaired as opposed to replacing or repairing the whole system.

The disposal of the solution or technology upon expiry is yet another environmental consideration. Each of the solution options has an end and thus will need to be taken through environmentally friendly techniques of disposal. The nature in which the disposal is made determines whether it is environmentally friendly or it has a negative impact on the environment. For this reason, a solution that may be disposed of through such environmental methods as recycling and biodegradability would be preferred in this case. Recyclable or biodegradable parts of a technology or device have the capability to reduce the negative environmental impacts as they promote sustainability (Administration, 2012, p.198). Recycling helps in conserving the environment through reducing the need for new materials for repair or replacement. Biodegradable materials decompose very fast and thus easily gotten rid of from the environment as soon as the life of the product comes to a close.

There is need to take into consideration in the input decisions the accessibility noise absorption, space requires for the system as well as controlled temperature in terms of environmental concerns in making a choice about a non-biodegradable bio waste management system.

In any project undertaking, the economic benefit analysis is always one of the most important determinants when it comes to making a choice of an option. In order to effectively address the economic considerations in such a way that there will be a balance between the cost and the value of the services offered a technique called Cost-Benefit Analysis Method may be used (Brian, 2016, p.266).  The Cost-Benefit Analysis Method encompasses the costs as well as the benefits of the each of the non-biodegradable bio waste management systems based on the analysis of their operations and hence offering a platform of making economic decisions. The Cost-Benefit Analysis Method offers a structured integrated system of both the economic and technical issues as well as architectural decisions. The Cost-Benefit Analysis Method makes use of techniques that are used on optimization, decision analysis and statistics to assist the designers of the various waste management solutions to group their uncertainty and thus settle on a subset of changes that could be implemented from a wide range of alternatives.

The design of a waste management system is an integral part of the complex a non-biodegradable bio waste management systems. With the increasing complexity of the system, the specifications for its design tend to gain more significance. The Architects Tradeoff Analysis Method has offered avenues for the designers of the various alternative solutions to reason on the technical tradeoffs that are encountered during the design as well as maintenance of each of the alternative solutions (Services, 2012, p.199). In Architects Tradeoff Analysis Method, the focus is the nature of the design of the solution in relation to the quality attributes which are among them performance, usability, and availability. These are the qualities that are used in shaping the design and thus determine the cost of building and maintaining a waste management system solution. The Architects Tradeoff Analysis Method as well makes an analysis of the various architectural tradeoff and the regions in which there may be consequences due to quality attributes at the same time.

The largest tradeoff in a sophisticated system like this one normally has to do with the economics. The concern remains how the organization, in this case, the hospitals and healthcare centers, should invest their resources in such a way that the gains are maximized as the risks are minimized. In all the areas where this question has been responded to the principal focus has been on the costs and these costs have been mainly the costs that are used in building the waste management sizes in the initial place and not necessarily its long-term costs through the various cycles of maintenance and operation. As such, the benefits that are accrued to the organization from a design decision are of equal importance to the costs of the various solutions to the organization (Madjid, 2014, p.119).

Bearing in mind that the resources that are used in the design, construction, and maintenance of a waste management solution are definite, there is need to have a rational process that would assist in choosing among the various design options during the design, construction and implementation periods (Kuznetsova, 2014, p.265). Each of the options will tend to have various costs, will adopt various features with each of them bringing to the company with them some benefits and bear with them some inherent risk and uncertainty. It is for this reason that there is need to have economic models that consider benefits, costs, risk as well as the implications of schedule.

In a bid to effectively address this need for an efficient decision making, the Cost Benefit Analysis Method is one of the promising tools that will see all the economic considerations are taken into account (Vivek, 2014, p.141). The Cost-Benefit Analysis Method would build upon Architects Tradeoff Analysis Method to come up with the benefits and costs of each of the waste management systems decisions and hence offering a means of optimizing such decisions. In order to maximize form such decisions, it is equally important to include the economic criteria such as costs and benefits that result from the technical criteria such as the responses of quality attributes.

With regard to the Cost Benefit Analysis Method, the organization would maximize the difference between the benefit that it will accrue from the waste management system and the cost it will incur in the implementation of the system (Keulartz, 2012, p.158). Ideally, the Cost Benefit Analysis Method starts where the user ends and relies on the artifacts that are generated by the Architects Tradeoff Analysis Method as the output. The economic goals of the organization are expected to have an impact on the decisions on the design solution to be chosen. The decisions on a specific waste management solution have technical implications besides economic impacts. The direct economic impact is the cost of designing, constructing and implementing the system. The technical implications include the features of the waste management system called the quality attributes (Boroughs, 2012, p.389). The quality attributes, in turn, significant economic implications for the advantages that can be achieved from the system.

Upon the application of the Architects Tradeoff Analysis Method, it is expected that a set of artifacts would be documented by the time the process is completed. Such include:

A description of the goals of the business that is important to waste management system success collection of design views which document the conventional or the proposed design

 A utility tree demonstrating a decomposition of the goals of the stakeholder for the design of the system- The utility tree should begin with statements of high level on the quality attributes and decomposing each of these instances into requirements of quality attributes including availability, usability, performance among other and achieves these scenarios (Drucker, 2012, p.233):

• A set of the identified risks
• The sensitivity points which include the design decisions that have an impact on more one quality attribute measure of concern(Douglas, 2017, p.175).
• A collection of the tradeoff points which include the architectural decisions that have impacts on more than a single quality attributes measure some being positive and others negative.

The Architects Tradeoff Analysis Method results in a set of design decisions that have the potential to be problematic following the quality attribute scenario that has elicited from the various stakeholders. These design decisions lead to some definite quality attribute responses among them security, performance levels, usability and modifiability among other attributes. It should not be forgotten that these design decisions as well have accompanying costs for example in case a design decision is such that it is meant to make use of redundant hardware in increasing the reliability, then such has cost implications (Boroughs, 2012, p.178). Any design decisions will have a measurable reliability level may be measured in terms of mean time to failure or availability of steady state. The responses of the quality attributes will attach value to the organization that is implementing the waste management system.

A single design strategy or solution has an effect on more than one quality attribute with some of the effects being negative and others positive all of which are varying in degrees. The actual effects of a particular design may not easily be identified in the case of a large waste management system. In as much as some of the variations are measurable through the use of simulation models, some of the effects caused by changes may be realized through elicitation of the experts who are tow work with the system and their comprehension of how the system behaves. The utility assessment of the different levels of the quality attributes form yet another source of subjectivity and uncertainty (Fortino, 2014, p.412).

In a bid to quantify the benefits of each of the design strategies, various experts may be interrogated to rate each of the alternative solutions based on their contribution to each of the quality attributes. The rating may be on a scale of -1 to +1 in which +1 means that the alternative solution has been perceived to have the best possible impact in terms of the design strategy for the waste management system (Futral, 2013, p.313). On the other hand, a -1 means that the alternative solution has been perceived to have the least possible impact in terms of the design strategy for the waste management system. These values are representative of the gains or losses in the utility when a specific change is made on the design the quality attribute (Anderson, 2009, p.295).

There are various benefits that come with various design strategies. The estimation of the cost of any of the solution options as fast as the adoption of the cost is concerned remains a significant issue. In most case, mature organizations resort to adopting their own ways and strategies for estimating costs across their projects (Allen, 2013, p.238). The Cost-Benefit Analysis Method does not offer any strange and new way of cost determination. That notwithstanding, taking into account that most of the techniques used in the estimation of cots as well as other implementations details, a cost estimation of design awareness should be adopted as the desirable goals. Through the design-aware cost model, it will be possible to get the cost estimate based on the nature of the components or the design style of the solution option that has been used in the chosen or other yet to be chosen design system option.

Currently, Cost-Benefit Analysis Method assumed that there are already methods of cost estimation that are available in the organization from which it is possible to obtain the cost estimates directly for each of the design strategies of the wide range of solution options (Jones, 2014, p.214). Besides eliciting the benefits and costs of the design strategy in each of the solution options that are being considered, it is fundamentally important to approximate the schedule implications of each of the design strategies with regard to the time elapse, the levels of dependency among the efforts used in implementation and shared use of very important resources. Maybe a design strategy could otherwise turn out to be undesirable and is not fitting the time-to-market goals of the organization (Administration, 2012, p.118). At this stage, the note will be taken on any contentious issue with the shared resources among the estimates. Such resources include the hardware and the personnel among other resources for they also have an impact on the feasibility of a design strategy.

References

Administration, F.H., 2012. Special Mixture Design Considerations and Methods for Warm Mix Asphalt: A Supplement to NCHRP Report 673, A Manual for Design of Hot Mix Asphalt with Commentary. 5th ed. New York: Transportation Research Board.

Allen, J.M., 2013. Technology Solutions for Today’s Lawyer. 5th ed. New York: American Bar Association.

Anderson, G., 2009. SAP Implementation Unleashed: A Business and Technical Roadmap to Deploying SAP. 4th ed. New York: Sams Publishing.

Boroughs, M.A., 2012. Using Technology to Create Value: Designing the Tools for the New HR Function. 7th ed. London: Gower Publishing, Ltd.

Brian, D., 2016. Space and Organizational Considerations in Academic Library Partnerships and Collaboration. 3rd ed. London: IGI Global.

Douglas, I., 2017. End-User Considerations in Educational Technology Design. 7th ed. Manchester: IGI Global.

Drucker, a.J., 2012. Technology Tools for Today’s High-Margin Practice: How Client-Centered Financial Advisors Can Cut Paperwork, Overhead, and Wasted Hours. 2nd ed. Oxford: John Wiley & Sons.

Fortino, G., 2014. internet of Things Based on Smart Objects: Technology, Middleware, and Applications. 4th ed. London: Springer Science & Business Media.

Futral, W., 2013. Intel® Trusted Execution Technology for Server Platforms: A Guide to More Secure Datacenters. 12th ed. New York: Apress.

Jones, M.C., 2014. Endangered Languages and New Technologies. 5th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Keulartz, F.W.J., 2012. Pragmatist Ethics for a Technological Culture. 5th ed. London: Springer Science & Business Media.

Kuznetsova, O.M., 2014. Practical Considerations for Adaptive Trial Design and Implementation. 9th ed. Moscow: Springer.

Light, T.P., 2011. Documenting Learning with ePortfolios: A Guide for College Instructors. 5th ed. London: John Wiley & Sons.

Madjid, T., 2014. Analytical Approaches to Strategic Decision-Making: Interdisciplinary Considerations: Interdisciplinary Considerations. 6th ed. London: IGI Global.

Mihailidis, A., 2011. Zero Effort Technologies: Considerations, Challenges, and Use in Health, Wellness, and Rehabilitation. 6th ed. Manchester: Morgan & Claypool Publishers.

Millett, L.I., 2012. Sustainability Considerations for Procurement Tools and Capabilities: Summary of a Workshop. 3rd ed. New York: National Academies Press.

Purnendu, T., 2013. Marketing Strategies for Higher Education Institutions: Technological Considerations and Practices: Technological Considerations and Practices. 8th ed. Cambridge: IGI Global.

Rapp, F., 2012. Contributions to a Philosophy of Technology: Studies in the Structure of Thinking in the Technological Sciences. 6th ed. Bombay: Springer Science & Business Media.

Services, E.E., 2012. Information Storage and Management: Storing, Managing, and Protecting Digital Information in Classic, Virtualized, and Cloud Environments. 2nd ed. Kansas: John Wiley & Sons.

Vivek, V., 2014. Educational, Psychological, and Behavioral Considerations in Niche Online Communities. 7th ed. London: IGI Global.