Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
POLLUTION
Prepared by :
MOHD EFFENDY BIN ROSLEY 2015682412
MUHAMMAD ALIFF BIN ABD RANI
2015107049
NUR AINAA BINTI MOHAMAD SALEHUDDIN
2015686638
Prepared for : 1
WHAT IS ODOUR?
2
TYPES OF ODOURS
Rubbish odours
3
TYPES OF ODOURS
4
TYPES OF ODOURS
Anaerobic Leachate
8
EFFECTS OF ODOURS
Health
17
ODOUR POLLUTION LAWS ABROAD
25
Peter Gibson LJ:
The defence of statutory authority is allowed on the
basis of the true construction of the scope and effect of
the statute. Parliament is presumed to have considered
the competing interests in the particular circumstances
which are the subject of the statute and to have
determined which is to prevail in the public interest in
authorising the particular development and use of land
and whether or not compensation is to be paid to those
whose common law rights are adversely affected by the
authorised development and use. But in the case of
planning permission granted pursuant to the statutory
scheme contained in the town and country planning
legislation it is far from obvious to me that Parliament
must be presumed to have intended that in every case 26 it
Barr v Biffa Waste Services Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ
312.
The case raises an important question of principle:
namely the extent to which operating a landfill site under
a regulatory permit provides a defence to claims in
nuisance arising from that activity.
The Court of Appeal, allowing Barrs appeal and
dismissing Biffas cross-appeal, held that it is not a
defence to a claim for nuisance to show that waste
disposal activities giving rise to a nuisance were carried
out in accordance with a landfill permit and without
negligence. The grant of a permit does not confer a
statutory immunity on the operator of a landfill site and
does not alter the character of the land such that use of
that land in accordance with its terms is a reasonable use
27
of land. The common law of nuisance remains unaffected
There are however certain problems in regards to the
protection of odour pollution in the UK. Though it seems
that the Councils initiative to scrutinize all the requisite
elements prior to taking an action is rather good, one could
argue on the period of such research. If it is taken too long,
wouldn't it be more detrimental towards the society if the
alleged pollution keeps in going on that time?
The Councils power after clarifying the odour pollution is
to serve an Abatement Notice on the person(s) or company
responsible. Sometimes, if not already in place, the
Environmental Officer can ask that Best Practicable Means
are put in place, which means that if there are things that
can be done to help minimise the odour, these steps are
taken.
Nothing is mentioned if whether the Councils have
prosecution powers against the perpetrators. The status28 of
BRIEF COMPARISON BETWEEN MALAYSIA &
UK
Odour pollution is primarily governed by the Environmental
Quality Act 1974. Other provisions that may assist in
curtailing odour pollution could be said is in existence within
the Local Government Act. Besides that, local authorities
are given the power to enact their onw by laws in dealing
with this. Pollution as a whole falls under the purview of a
criminal act, thus the procedures (report, investigation,
prosecution, sentence) must be accordingly followed.
The Environmental Protection Act 1990 is the highest law in
the UK that governs all pollution, including odour. Actions are
taken by Local Councils upon receiving a report. Complain
could also be made directly to a Magistrate. These
proceedings does not seem to be criminal in nature. Thus
laws regarding criminal proceedings may be relaxed.
29
One good approach that the Malaysian law could
adopt from its UK counterpart is that its leniency to
allow the public to directly report an excessive
odour pollution to a Magistrate. Besides that, the
law also creates a clear guideline in dealing with the
matter, right from how a report should be made,
how the authority would scrutinize that report, and
even what are the requisite actions that they should
take after that.
Lack of Lack of
Enforceme Educatio
nt of Law n
34
MAJOR LIVESTOCK SECTOR
The animal waste contributes to odour, in particular
hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and ammonia. These can
cause continuous source of strong, persistent and
unreasonably offensive odours. The resulting of air
pollution is interfering with surrounding areas.
For example in 1998, a large-scale pig farming in
Negeri Sembilan had led to discharges of polluting
effluent into tributaries of the Sepang River, which
sits on the boundary of Selangor and Negeri
Sembilan. The pig sector has been identified as the
main sector that contributes to major problem to the
35
WEAKNESS OF COMPLAIN
SYSTEM.
In Malaysia, odour nuisance is rarely reported.
The affected population did not have sufficient
knowledge to complain about the odour issues.
They also believed their complaints would not be
addressed seriously by the relevant authorities and
thought that the complaints process would be lengthy.
For example, CAP is disappointed in the manner the
Penang State government, Municipal Council of Seberang
Perai (MPSP) and other government agencies has
handled the complaint of odour pollution that has had a
great impact on the community in Kampung Tok Subuh,
Juru near Bukit Mertajam, Seberang Perai Tengah.
36
LACK OF EDUCATION
The understanding of laws in general and
environmental laws in particular by the public
is limited.
37
LACK OF ENFORCEMENT OF
LAW.
The capacity of authorities to handle violations
of the environmental law is weak with
cumbersome procedures to enforce the law.
Reward Role of
Mechanism NGO
RECOMMENDATIONS
Role of Technologi
Public es of
Authorities Odour
Control
Buffer Zone
Effective of between Odour
Complaint Emission Areas
Channels. and Surrounding
Areas 40
MANAGEMENT OF LIVESTOCK
WASTE AND YARD CLEANLINESS
41
ESTABLISHING BUFFER ZONE BETWEEN
ODOUR EMISSION AREAS AND
SURROUNDING AREAS
42
TECHNOLOGIES OF ODOUR CONTROL
There are two main types of technologies to treat odour.
1. Physical/chemical technologies remove bad-
smelling emissions by changing them with chemicals
(chemical scrubbers), burning (incinerators) and by
adsorbing the emissions with carbon.
2. Biological technologies remove emissions using
biofilters that pass the emissions upwards which at
the same time trickling a cleansing solution
downwards (biotrickling filters).
It is effective and economical for low
concentrations of contaminants in large quantities
of air.
Biological systems for odor control rely basically on
the microorganism activity that converts odor 43
EFFECTIVE DISSEMINATION OF
COMPLAINT CHANNELS.
Transparency in the complaints process and data
management is necessary whereby the public is well
informed of the actions taken by the relevant
authorities over their plight.
Community complaints must be resolved, and not
neglected in favour of a corporation.
Once regulators have higher quality information,
more integrated information systems, and more
internal capacity for priority setting it will not be
difficult for them to manage pollution more cost-
effectively.
44
ROLE OF PUBLIC AUTHORITIES
Local authorities and government agencies must take
into consideration environmental impacts including
odour impacts to communities when planning and
issuing licenses to premises.
The authorities need to regularly check the place that
has odour complaints and ensure that the operation is
carried out under best management practice.
The authorities such as the Department of
Environmental in particular and the Department of
Veterinary Services should conduct active promotion to
the public so that they are able to report on the
activities causing the odour pollution.
45
REWARD MECHANISM
46
ROLE OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL
ORGANISATIONS (NGOS)
NGOs dedicated for the cause of protection of the
environment, can play a positive role in enforcing
environmental laws on odour pollution.
47
CONCLUSION
Odour pollution is indeed the most complex of
all the air pollution problems.