Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Wiley - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Wiley - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2021 Jul 12;31(4):111–121. doi: 10.1002/rem.21692

Consequences of COVID‐19 pandemic on solid waste management: Scenarios pertaining to developing countries

Abdulaziz I Almulhim 1, Imran Ahmad 2, Silpi Sarkar 3, Murthy Chavali 4,✉
PMCID: PMC8441703  PMID: 34539158

Abstract

Undoubtedly the most searched and spoken word of last year is coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), which initially originated in Wuhan, China near the end of 2019. COVID‐19 is a disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). Albeit almost all countries shut down their borders to prevent rapid spread of the virus. However, the number of cases continues to increase in developing countries at a faster rate due to community and cluster transmission. The severity of this epidemic made it a pandemic as it progressed to over 200 countries. The World Health Organization (WHO), governments, and national disease control and prevention units worked together to break the chain and are working to contain the catastrophic impact of COVID‐19. They formulated and recommended various guidelines like social distancing, frequent hand washing, and social distancing to inhibit the spread of the virus. WHO also advised that the general population and medical personnel wear face masks, face shields, gloves, and aprons. As a result, this waste category has substantially increased and, if not disposed of properly, may cause the infection or help to catalyze COVID‐19. In developing countries, poor solid waste management may aggravate chances of spreading COVID‐19. Sustainable solid waste management is a critical parameter for the health, wellbeing, and development of society. The measures adopted to contain and restrict the spread of the COVID‐19 pandemic and minimize the degrees of freedom in commercial events affected solid waste management considerably. During this crucial time, the services provided by waste management agencies and personnel are invaluable and these services help to prevent the improper disposal of waste, which may lead to health risks due to the spread of COVID. COVID‐19 is a new and novel virus and experts are learning more about it overtime and with evolving science. This review paper provides insight into different types of solid wastes generated during the pandemic, their consequences, and the implication of various policies.

Keywords: disposal, face masks, medical waste, policies, solid waste management

1. INTRODUCTION

The global catastrophe of the coronavirus severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) and the disease it causes (COVID‐19) that struck the world in late 2019, originating in Wuhan, China and speedily proliferated and took the entire globe in its claws. To date, May 18, 2021 (11:20 a.m.), there have been 163,368,005 confirmed cases, 3,385,518 deaths (2.07% rate) and 143,004,248 recovered cases (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1087466/covid19‐cases‐recoveries‐deaths‐worldwide/). The vaccination drive started in December 2020 and there are 1,480,958,362 doses administered to date (https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html). In March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID‐19 as a pandemic disease, which spread suddenly and rapidly to almost all the countries in the world (222 countries). The impact of COVID‐19 was devastating in terms of socioeconomic aspects as many countries imposed partial or full movement control orders (lockdowns) as a measure to mitigate the outbreak. This made the situation more traumatic because all the activities, like tourism, sports, social, and religious gatherings either stopped or reduced to a minimum level. The outbreak posed tremendous pressure on health care facilities and workers and even the developed nations succumbed to the pressure. There was an acute shortage of hospital beds, life support equipment, and the worthiest oxygen in the countries which are too vulnerable in terms of population and development like India. Hence, the medical care agencies and professionals are facing the daunting task of providing sufficient, appropriate, and timely treatment and medical services to a flood of patients.

Since the demand is increasing at a much higher rate than the supply and availability, to cope with it efficiently, safely, and safeguarding themselves from the infection will lead to breaking the chain (WHO, 2020). There were negative consequences of lockdowns but, in terms of the environment, the condition seems to be improved as the concentration of greenhouse gas emissions decreased because of reduced vehicular emissions and industrial air pollution. On the other hand, there was a considerable increase in the generation of solid waste due to excessive use of masks, personal protective equipment (PPE), restaurant takeaway plastic boxes, empty sanitizer bottles, disinfectant bottles, and throat and nasopharyngeal swab kits to conduct corona polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test (Abu‐Qdais et al., 2020). None of these items are biodegradable and ultimately become solid wastes. PPE waste generated at medical facilities must be properly collected, transported, and readily disposed of as medical waste (hazardous) to avoid the risk of infection (Hua & Shaw, 2020). Taking the case of face masks, which became a necessity during the outbreak, their excessive use and properties are creating an impact on the environment. Stacked piles of face masks were found near the coasts of Taiwan, Hongkong, mainland China, the United States, and France (https://www.reuters.com/article/us‐health‐coronavirus‐hongkong‐environme‐idUSKBN20Z0PP; https://www.greenpeace.org/aotearoa/story/where‐did‐5500‐tonnes‐of‐discarded‐face‐masks‐end‐up/).

Some of the disadvantages of used face masks are:

  • (i)

    They are unrecyclable because putting them in recycling may lead to the transmission of the virus and possible infection;

  • (ii)

    Medical face masks are made up of polypropylene (PP), which takes a long time to degrade and releases toxic substances during the process;

  • (iii)

    Their improper disposal may pose risk to wildlife and ocean animals, because of their contaminated nature; and

  • (iv)

    Overwhelming pressure on landfills (Ahmad et al., 2019) and incineration facilities, may lead to contaminated landfill leachate and acute air pollution.

Furthermore, issues associated with COVIDd‐19‐related air pollution may cause risks problems to the human population as the health effects from COVID‐19 are mostly related to breathing (Qarani, 2020). To understand the severity and overwhelming nature of the problem, Green Peace International conducted a survey in Taiwan to assess the solid waste impacts of used face masks. The case study estimated that in just three months 1.3 billion masks accounting for 5500 metric tonnes (1100 trucks each of 5 tonnes capacity) of face masks were disposed of (Jenny, 2020). The nonbiodegradable masks were made of polypropene, weighing between 4680–6240 metric tonnes, and could take a minimum of 450 years to degrade. Microplastics released from the degrading masks disposed of in water bodies could enter marine creatures, impacting their life‐cycle (Alok, 2020). Various problems and pollution caused due to face masks are shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Illustrations showing different cases of pollution caused by face masks [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Literature on COVID‐19 shows that there are many papers on the symptoms, preventive measures, and its effect on the population and economy. But fewer studies are focussing on the scenario of solid waste generation, especially in developing countries that are more susceptible and vulnerable to the pandemic. The research presented herein provides an insight on the impact of COVID‐19 on the generation of solid waste including medical and other types of waste. The review focuses on the potential problems arising from the improper disposal of waste generated as a result of COVID‐19 and also summarizes policies and remedial measures that should be considered to overcome the situation.

2. ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH COVID‐19 SOLID WASTE

The generation of waste can vary depending on the consumption dynamics of the population or the modification of social habits. From the recent situation imposed by the COVID‐19 pandemic, people have had to make changes in the dynamics of life. Being at home more often was transformed from being a measure of self‐care to an order derived from preventive isolation. Undoubtedly, these lifestyle changes resulted in environmental repercussions related to the generation and management of solid waste. In the first aspect, this is due to variations in consumption habits and the associated changes in waste generation (Van Doremalen et al., 2020).

First, the permanence of people at home, the suspension of classes in public and private schools, and the interruption of recreational and commercial activities influence the generation of waste. Based on this, public waste management services must make proper adjustments in collection routes and schedules (Klemeš et al., 2020; Nzeadibe, 2020). Second, wastes from the homes of people infected with COVID‐19 may have traces of the virus. Although the intra‐hospital management of patients infected with COVID‐19 places controls on COVID‐19‐containing solid waste streams, the same does not happen in homes. Used masks, tissues, gloves, containers, and other wastes generated by infected people can be contaminated with the virus and should be managed separately from other wastes generated in the homes of COVID‐19‐infected people (Feng et al., 2020).

Undoubtedly, the use of disposable gloves and protective clothing (usually plastic) had lead to an increase in waste generation and precautions should be taken to prevent the spread of contagions from these discarded wastes. During the COVID‐19 pandemic, the commitment of the public is necessary to deal with new waste management challenges (Global Network of Civil Society Organizations for Disasters Reduction, 2020). Awareness must be made of the importance of correctly separating the waste at the source, and disposing of non‐contaminated wastes in separate containers for subsequent transportation to recycling or solid waste management facilities. Potentially infected wastes must be separated from other wastes and containerized in tightly closed bags before being transferred to waste management service providers. The effect on solid waste generation and management during the COVID‐19 outbreak is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

An appraisal of COVID‐19 influence on waste management (Van Fan et al., 2021). COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019 [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Those who are at home infected with the COVID‐19 virus should adopt preventive measures around the management of their wastes to avoid the spread of the disease; in particular, to waste management personnel who collect waste without using PPE (McKibbin & Fernando, 2020; Pan et al., 2020). Although as a society there is a lack of training for the appropriate management of solid waste, there is an opportunity at a global level for the public to act in a responsible and supportive manner concerning waste management during the pandemic.

Humans are part of the complex fabric of life, on which people impose their mark on the desire to guarantee sustenance and opportunities with patterns shaped by desires or ambitions. Human activities have been altering ecosystems and causing unprecedented environmental impacts for decades. Today, an impaired planet continues to support life, but the resources are finite, the carrying capacity limited, and in this struggle between the resilience of nature and the transforming power of man, the former does not always win (International Solid Waste Association, 2020). A few years ago, scientists warned about the impact of climate change on the increase in intensity, extension, and impact of epidemics, as well as the need to be prepared to face a major pandemic (Walsh et al., 2005). In recent decades, the emergence of viral epidemics, such as haemorrhagic fevers (Lassa, Ebola), new coronaviruses (CoV) associated with respiratory syndromes (SARS‐CoV, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome‐CoV), influenza, and dengue, among other diseases, have caused a great impact on human health and society due to their high mortality rates.

3. GENERATION AND DISPOSAL OF MEDICAL WASTE

Worldwide deaths due to diseases related to unmanaged medical waste are estimated to be approximately 5.2 million annually, including 4 million children (The Daily Star, 2020). Due to the surge of COVID‐19, excessive biomedical waste has been generated which is posing a threat to public health and the environment. Further, the improper handling of the generated medical waste led to the spread of SAR‐COV‐2 (Sarawut, 2020).

Since the infections are being transmitted by different routes, such as droplets/aerosols, there has been a wide mandate for PPE. PPE is comprised of gloves, masks, face shields, gowns, and goggles used to prevent individual‐to‐individual transmission (Iyer et al., 2021). The WHO estimated that 76 million gloves, 1.6 million goggles, and 89 million medical masks will be required due to COVID‐19 (WHO, 2020). There is an urgency to manufacture a sufficient quantity of PPE which also demands segregating PPE and other Covid‐19‐related medical wastes and implementing proper waste management practices to minimize the spread of infection (Saar et al., 2004 ; EU, 2020).

3.1. Biomedical waste

The waste generated in managing pathogens or infections in a community is referred to as biomedical waste (BMW). BMW includes human tissues, body fluids, cotton swabs, bandages, contaminated beddings, dressings, blood bags, needles, and syringes along with disposable items, such as PPE, including masks, gloves, gowns, caps, goggles, face shield, and shoe covers (Bengali, 2020). Sectors of solid waste management are facing challenges due to the increase in the quantity of BMW (Minghua et al., 2009). It is estimated that approximately 200,000 metric tonnes of BMW are generated annually worldwide which is treated by 198 BMW treatment facilities and 225 BMW incinerators (Minoglou et al., 2017). Thus, the daily generation of BMW is approximately 5500 metric tonnes (Ranjan et al., 2020). During the current pandemic, it was reported that approximately 214 metric tonnes of additional medical waste were generated per day in Wuhan, China alone (https://news.cgtn.com/news/; 2020‐03‐17/How‐Wuhan‐copes‐with‐its‐mountains‐of‐medical‐waste‐‐OUxhr4jW1i/index.html). As another example, an Asian Development Bank survey of BMW generated due to the pandemic revealed the following BMW generation rates: Bangkok, Thailand—210 tonnes/day, Manila, Philippines—280 tonnes/day, and Jakarta, Indonesia—212 tonnes/day (ADB, 2020). Thus, it is important to understand the categories of biomedical wastes, various methods of safe disposal of the various types of BMW generated as a result of COVID‐19 as shown in Table 1.

Table 1.

Categories of biomedical waste and treatment/disposal methods

Category Components in waste Content in waste Methods to treat and dispose
Category 1 Human tissues, organs and other body Anatomical Incineration
Category 2 Animal tissues, organs, and other body parts Anatomical Landfill disposal and incineration
Category 3 Laboratory cultures and microorganisms used in research Microorganisms Microwaving, autoclaving, and incineration
Category 4 Needles, scalpels, syringes, blades, glass, etc. Waste sharps Chemical treatment and disinfection
Category 5 Outdated medicines that are discarded Discarded medicines; cytotoxic drugs Incineration
Category 6 Blood‐contaminated cotton, dressings, soiled plaster casts, and delivery tubing Blood Microwaving, autoclaving, and incineration
Category 7 Catheters, tubing, and intravenous sets Bodily fluids Disinfection and incineration
Category 8 Waste from laboratory cleaning, washing, housekeeping, and disinfecting Liquid waste Chemical and biological treatment
Category 9 BMW incineration ash Solid waste Chemical treatment (stabilization) and landfill disposal
Category 10 Waste laboratory chemicals Liquid and solid waste Chemical treatment and incineration
Open in a new tab

The increase of BMW generation during the pandemic without proper waste management practices may contribute to plastic contamination generated from manufacturing PPE (Schnurr et al., 2018). Further, releases of virus contamination to soil or water ecosystems can lead to the advancement of antibiotic‐resistant bacteria and antibiotic‐resistance genes (Chi et al., 2020; He et al., 2020). It is reported that 10% to 25% of BMW is dangerous and, thus, BMW should be properly managed or it can pose a risk to public health (Rao & Ghosh, 2020).

3.2. Assessment of biomedical waste management

Segregation is a fundamental step to managing BMW. An example of BMW segregation and management is India's 2016 Bare Acts rules that require the separation of different wastes and management of these waste types based on color codes. (Sharma, 1998). Schedule III (https://megspcb.gov.in/documents/SCHEDULE%20III%20BMW.pdf) of the Bares Act rules require waste bags to be properly labelled with a biohazard or cytotoxic symbol. Container labelling must include the name of the department/laboratory for tracing purposes. The collected BMW is required to be stored in collection rooms or a dedicated storage area where the bags are stored until being transported for treatment and/or disposal. The BMW is transported by a truck with identification tags of radiofrequency. The waste transportation vehicle must be segregated into separate cabins for different types of BMW (https://umibiomedical.com/5‐types‐biohazardous‐waste/). The truck must also have a leak‐proof cover and an interior of made of aluminium or stainless steel for proper washing and disinfection. The SARS‐CoV‐2 related BMW and its longevity on surfaces of various materials can be categorized as shown in Table 2.

Table 2.

SARS‐CoV‐2 virus longevity on surfaces of several materials

Items/materials Longevity (h)
Printing and tissue paper 3
Copper 4
Cardboard 24
Wood and cloth 48
Plastics 72
Stainless steel 72
Glass and Banknote 96
Open in a new tab

Abbreviation: SARS‐CoV‐2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

3.3. Personal protective equipment (PPE)

According to WHO, COVID‐19 transmission among humans can be mitigated by practising various rules, such as social distancing, wearing face masks, face shields, regular washing of hands, and using sanitizer (WHO, 2020; Manikandan, 2020). The fundamental PPE for medical personnel caring for patients with COVID‐19 includes face masks, aprons, rubber boots, shoe covers, gloves, face shields, medical test kits, and plastic containers (Kampf et al., 2020). The single‐use plastic items and PPE along with other BMW are inducing “PPE pollution” in the environment.

An example of PPE pollution is the presence of used face masks dispersed within stretches at Soko Island Beach, Hong Kong (Saadat, Rawtani, Hussain 2020). Also, reports of wastes floating in the waters along the French Coast wherein 80%–90% of the wastes was comprised of PPE, which poses an immediate concern due to the mismanagement of potentially infected wastes (Kitchener, 2020). The average generation rate of plastic waste in the Southeast Asian countries before COVID‐19 was 5500 metric tonnes per day. However, during the pandemic, this quantity increased to 6300 tons per day. Thailand can expect a 30% increase in annual plastic waste volume (TEI Asia Food, 2020; TEI Plastics, 2020). Indian scientists have suggested using pyrolysis to convert the plastic used in PPE into a renewable liquid fuel to lessen the impact of increased plastic waste generated during COVID‐19 (Jambeck et al., 2015). Prata et al. (2020) reports an estimated 129 billion disposable face masks and 65 billion plastic gloves generated annually as a visible manifestation of the new normal.

A literature survey reported that approximately 22 kg of plastic waste is generated during PCR techniques for every 1000 coronavirus tests (CPCB, 2020). There is evidence that reverse transcription‐PCR (RT‐PCR) generates 37.27 g of plastic residues per sample (Celis et al., 2021). Therefore, based on approximately 1 billion COVID‐19 tests to date, the worldwide plastic residues from COVID‐19 testing with RT‐PCR have generated approximately 18,600 tons through June 2021.

3.4. Face masks

As previously discussed, the COVID‐19 pandemic has increased the usage of face masks, subsequently increasing BMW (Sangkham, 2020). In response to regular alerts from WHO and government mandates to wear face masks to control the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2, people are now more inclined to wear different types of face coverings (Feitzelberg, 2020), including bandanas, hand‐sewn masks, commercial, and disposable medical masks.

A mask is a disposable unit that provides a barrier between the mouth and nose of the wearer and airborne contaminants. As face masks become a requirement for people around the world and not just medical professionals; the purposes they serve are as varied as the individuals who wear them. Different types of masks that are specifically designed to prevent the spread of COVID‐19 include the following:

  • 1.

    Basic cloth face mask

  • 2.

    Surgical face mask

  • 3.

    N95 respirator

  • 4.

    KN95 respirator

  • 5.

    Self‐contained breathing apparatus

  • 6.

    Filtering face‐piece respirator

  • 7.

    P100 respirator/gas mask

  • 8.

    Full face respirator

  • 9.

    Full‐length face shield

The daily face mask quantity can be assessed using the following equation adapted from Nzediegwu and Chang (Nzediegwu & Chang, 2020):

DFM=P×Up×FMAR×(FMGP/10,000)

Where, DFM = Daily face mask use (pieces);

P = Population (persons);

UP = Urban population (%);

FMAR = Face masks acceptance rate (80%);

FMGP = Number of face mask used (per person/day) (assumed to be 1).

Face masks became part of most people's daily lives during the pandemic. Many face masks are made from plastics and designed to be used just once leading to thousands of tonnes of additional waste going to landfill. A study by (Nsikak et al., 2021) reports that 3.4 billion face masks or face shields are discarded every day. Asia is projected to throw away 1.8 billion face masks daily, the highest quantity of any continent globally. China, with the world's largest population (1.4 billion) discards nearly 702 million face masks daily (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/how‐to‐stop‐discarded‐face‐masks‐from‐polluting‐the‐planet). In another estimate. If the United Kingdom population used a single‐use mask each day for a year, it would create 66,000 tonnes of waste and 57,000 tonnes of plastic packaging (https://theconversation.com/millions‐of‐face‐masks‐are‐being‐thrown‐away‐during‐covid‐19‐heres‐how‐to‐choose‐the‐best‐one‐for‐the‐planet‐147787).

4. HOUSEHOLD WASTE

Household waste (HW) is one of the constituents of municipal solid waste (MSW). The surge of MSW in urban areas needs to be monitored as it is generated daily and thus there is a requirement to manage this waste. Municipal solid waste management practices are typically implemented by local authorities to maintain hygienic conditions in residential areas (Hornweg et al., 2012). In a case study in Dehradun City, India, it was reported the major HW constituents are: food/kitchen (≥80% of total weight) which is tailed by polythene and plastic (≈7%), paper (≈6%), cardboard (≈2%), glass/ceramic scraps (≈1%), and other miscellaneous items (e. g., cloth, silt, dirt, rubber; ≈ 4%). The HW generation rate is dependent on the socioeconomic groups within a community and increases with an increase in family income. Suthar and Singh (2015) observed a positive correlation between the rate of HW waste generation and higher income groups and family size.

5. COVID‐19'S INCREASE IN PLASTIC WASTE DUE TO TAKEAWAY RESTAURANTS

As a result of the COVID‐19 pandemic, the restaurant industry has shown an increase in the amount of takeaway business as customers are relying on delivery, instead of in‐person, services. In addition, online shopping has also increased. During the COVID‐19 crisis and abrupt lockdown in several countries for several months, restaurants and consumers have become dependent on single‐use plastic bags and containers for takeaway (Chaudhary et al., 2021; Gagan et al., 2020). The reusability concept of plastics has taken a back seat during this crisis due to concerns regarding potential contamination. For example, before the pandemic. Just Salad, a popular food chain in (USA), was producing reusable bowls saving 75,000 pounds of plastic a year. But during the pandemic, the restaurant halted the program and focused on pickup and delivery which meant only using disposable plastics for packaging. Further, Starbucks and Dunkin Donuts prohibited customers from using reusable mugs.

6. PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THE COLLECTION, TRANSPORT, AND DISPOSAL FOR PRIVATE AND PUBLIC WASTE MANAGEMENT

6.1. Collection and transport

Biosecurity precautions for BMW, such as gloves, eye protection, masks, plastic aprons, and boots or shoe covers, are recommended to maintain hygienic conditions. These precautions include the following:

  • Sealing trash bags containing BMW by knotting bags containing BMW and

  • avoiding emptying waste from one container to another

  • Consider all waste BMW containers as contaminated

  • Ensure all sharps and biohazard wastes have been disinfected.

  • Maintain the containers, transport carts, storage areas, and final waste disposal areas in optimal hygiene conditions.

6.2. Disposal

The disposal of solid wastes in many countries is carried out mostly in an uncontrolled or semi‐controlled way, with only 30% of the garbage being deposited in sanitary landfills (Abed Al Ahad et al., 2020). Solid waste is typically classified in various ways according to its materials, biodegradability, toxicity, etc. Solid waste is also classified according to the domestic, commercial, or service activity that generates it. They can be domiciliary, coming directly from domestic activity such as kitchen waste, paper, and consumer goods in general. On the other hand, increasing urbanization favors a greater generation of waste or waste. These aspects must be evaluated for the COVID‐19 pandemic, which implies a crucial and evident challenge today. These wastes are made up of materials discarded by families, industrial and commercial waste that, in general, represent a problem that has consequences on health, the environment, and the local economy if they are not managed properly. Given the multidimensional nature of the phenomenon studied, it is necessary to combine comprehensive care towards a root solution, which requires an institutional commitment to the awareness and participation of all sectors of the population, including private initiative and civil society. The new post‐COVID‐19 scenario represents an opportunity to redefine the social purpose of companies, develop action plans aimed at guaranteeing integration.

The pandemic could become an opportunity to unite in solidarity and turn the crisis into a catalyst for the integration of the economic, social, and environmental dimensions. The different polymers used in the manufacture of plastic can be additive with biocidal and viricidal substances capable of eliminating any undesirable viral or bacterial system from their surface. This can be achieved both by polymeric coatings and by providing viricidal or antibacterial properties to the plastic in bulk. However, the post‐COVID‐19 era represents a paradigm shift and a real qualitative leap. From now on, it will be necessary to increase safety and the prevention of possible contagions derived from contact with surfaces through technology (Walker, 2020). Public spaces will move towards greater automation, accelerating the development of technologies. World & Indian and Romanian waste circumstances are shown in Figures 3 and 4, respectively.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

A wasteful enterprise: COVID‐19 and World & India's Waste Management Story‐degrees of change (Banerjee, 2020). COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019 [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Assessment of COVID‐19 waste flows during the emergency state in Romania and related public health and environmental concerns (Mihai, 2020). COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019; ICU, intensive care unit [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

The COVID‐19 pandemic has resulted in an increase in the amount of sanitary waste, with PPE such as masks and gloves representing the highest proportion, along with other medical waste. In addition, the quarantine policies established in most countries have encouraged consumers to become more dependent on online purchases of food, which have led to a plausible increase in the generation of plastic and plastic packaging waste; single‐use only. Although this new paradigm has underlined the public value of plastic, it has also highlighted changes in consumption patterns and waste disposal.

Furthermore, deficiencies and discrepancies in existing waste management systems before the COVID‐19 pandemic (Di Marco et al., 2020), such as staff shortages, limited capacity of treatment and disposal facilities, lack of technical knowledge and resources. Economic conditions can further exacerbate health and environmental problems, especially in developing countries or emerging economies, both for public and private companies. Therefore, designing strategies for sustainable management, which guarantees the safe handling and proper disposal of these wastes, is an urgent and essential challenge to minimize the possible impacts. While the rapid disposal of single‐use products is often seen as beneficial to the health of staff and consumers, the imminent increase in the volume of this waste from the COVID‐19 pandemic challenges with overwhelming systems of existing waste management, which have not been able to deal with existing plastic waste satisfactorily. However, before the COVID‐19 pandemic, the world was already facing challenges in the waste management sector, where approximately two billion people worldwide lacked access to waste collection and approximately three billion, lacked controlled waste disposal facilities (https://www.unep.org/news‐and‐stories/press‐release/mounting‐problem‐worlds‐cities‐produce‐10‐billion‐tonnes‐waste‐each). Whereas, workers involved in waste management, especially in developing countries, did not have PPE and the increased reliance on plastics during the COVID‐19 pandemic (Wu & McGoogan, 2020) may be temporary or it may change our long‐term goals of accelerating the transition to a circular economy. The adoption of the circular economy as a model that guarantees innovations in existing products and integrates new sustainable technologies (Hui et al., 2006), will allow retaining more and more resources in the production and consumption circle, thus reducing the generation of waste, such as plastic waste. In developing countries, informal waste collectors/waste recyclers are the most vulnerable despite their enormous contribution to the informal recycling of waste (Ellen et al., 2001; Prüss‐Ustün & Corvalan, 2006).

7. POLICIES IMPLICATION

The authors have developed the following policy recommendations for governmental agencies to consider.

Recycling: One of the habits to maintain is recycling, but to take into consideration controls during pandemic conditions to prevent potential exposure to contagions. A serious issue as a result of the Covid‐19 pandemic will be a decrease in recyclable materials. Recycling represents an important source of energy and income in many countries (i.e., Mexico, France, Germany, Brazil, and Colombia).

Home management of waste in positive or quarantined homes for COVID‐19: For people with a positive COVID‐19 test, the patient's waste, including disposable materials used by the sick person (gloves, handkerchiefs, masks), should be disposed of in a plastic bag in a dedicated garbage can, preferably with a lid and an opening pedal, without separating recyclable wastes. The plastic bag should be tightly closed and placed in a second garbage bag, next to the room exit, while wearing gloves and a mask. Immediately after removing the bag, the caregiver or patient should complete hand hygiene, with soap and water, for at least 40–60 s.

Sanitation worker protection: Prioritize permanent training for sanitation workers on the handling of waste collected at homes and equip them with PPE verifying their use and implementing COVID‐19 biosafety protocols for solid waste management.

Municipalities should also consider developing indicators that measure the efficiency of the measures taken and the application of said measures by the municipalities (Danso et al., 2019; Fuso et al., 2019). Figure 5 illustrates the measures to contain the spread of the COVID‐19 virus by proper waste management.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

Minimization of the spread of SARS‐CoV‐2 via household waste produced by subjects affected by COVID‐19 or in quarantine (Di Maria et al., 2020). COVID‐19, coronavirus disease 2019; MBT, mechanical‐biological treatment; SARS‐CoV‐2, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [Color figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]

There are four types of landfill infrastructures for the final disposal of waste: (1) sanitary landfill (municipal waste), (2) security landfills (hazardous waste), (3) mixed landfills (can include municipal and nonmunicipal waste), and (4) construction and demolition debris landfills. The lack of information and monitoring systems restrict the ability to plan and develop elements for decision‐making, management, the formalization of plans and programs, the prioritization of activities, the allocation of resources, and the performance of monitoring and surveillance tasks and controls.

8. CONCLUSION

With the rapid spread and waves (1–4) of COVID‐19 currently with over 20.1 million global confirmed cases and approximately 742,000 deaths across the globe (Sarkodie & Owusu, 2021), waste management is becoming critical to socioeconomic development and health outcomes during the COVID‐19 pandemic. There is an urgent global call for waste management from households and medical facilities to be treated as an essential public service which may mitigate the potential threats of the COVID‐19 pandemic on environmental sustainability and health outcomes. It is important to establish guidelines for solid waste management and sanitation services to manage risks posed by SARS‐CoV‐2. Medical facilities should ensure that BMW is managed with specific biosafety precautions. The general population should be informed of proper waste management provisions when dealing with wastes generated by those with COVID‐19, such as segregating masks, gloves, and other wastes and following the waste management techniques described herein.

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The authors declare that there are no conflict of interests.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors would like to acknowledge this paper to the front lines around the globe who are giving their all to protect and treat communities.

Biographies

Abdulaziz I. Almulhim is an assistant professor in the Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University in Saudi Arabia. His main research interest lies in Resources Management and Policy and Sustainable Development field. Dr. Almulhim received his PhD from University of Liverpool in Urban and Regional Planning subject in 2020, UK. Dr. Almulhim obtained a master's degree from College of Architecture and Planning in Urban and Regional Planning subject in 2015 at University of Colorado Denver, Colorado, US, and he obtained his bachelor's degree from College of Architecture and Planning in Urban and Regional Planning subject in 2011 at Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, Dammam, Saudi Arabia (formerly Dammam University).

Imran Ahmad, Ph.D. Scholar is a research scholar at Malaysia‐Japan International Institute of Technology (MJIIT), UTM, Universiti Technologi Malaysia (UTM), Malaysia. He is currently working on the treatment of restaurant wastewater containing oil and grease using microalgae. He specializes in the anaerobic treatment of industrial wastewaters, especially landfill leachate. He completed BTech (Civil engineering) and MTech (Environmental Engineering) from Aligarh Muslim University (A.M.U.), India; MPhil (Environmental Engineering), Razak Faculty of Technology. He has published his work in peer reviewed journals and book chapters, and has attended and presented in many International conferences. He received the Algae Industry Incubation Consortium (AIIC), Japan (Grants Award) and My Membrane Award, Malaysia in 2021. He also has 8 years of teaching experience of in AICTE approved Engineering Colleges in India.

Silpi Sarkar, Ph.D. is with Sunshine International School, West Bengal. She completed a Master of Science (M.Sc.) from Manipal University and Doctor of Philosophy in the field of Gastropods (Snails) from Vignan University. She worked as Project Assistant in the DST Government of India Project during the tenure of her Ph.D. Her research interests include Molecular Biology, Systematics, Phylogeny, and Gastropods and has authored or contributed to 12 peer reviewed journal publications and nearly 9 book chapters. She has attended several National and International Conferences and also won 3rd prize as ‘Young Scientist' in oral presentation in an International Conference.

Murthy Chavali, Ph.D. is presently a Professor of Analytical Chemistry & Nanotechnology working as Director (NTRC‐MCETRC, India) and International Nanotech Research Consultant. He received his B.Sc., in Chemistry (ANU, India); M.Sc. (Tech.) in Chemistry (JNTUH, India), and his Ph.D.Tech., in Analytical Chemistry (TUWIEN, Austria) and served as Postdoctoral Fellow in USA, Japan (as JSPS and VBL Fellow), and Taiwan (NSC Fellow). Professor Chavali has over 28 years of research experience and 22 years of teaching experience; and also established 9 research laboratories. He is a recipient of several research felicitations/awards/fellowships, commendations both nationally and internationally and has been invited to several countries to speak on his groups' research activities. He was recently awarded with a National Level Chemistry Award for Best PG Chemistry Teacher (Prof. Dr. Bhupendra Sahai Saxena Award‐2020) given by Association of Chemistry Teachers (ACT), India. He is also a Visiting Research Professor, Kobe University (Kobe, Japan), Visiting Professor, Providence University (Taichung, Taiwan), Visiting Research Scientist (NSC, Taiwan) and Visiting Research Fellow, European Consortium. He has published over 250 articles/communiqués in various international and national journals and has presented his work in over 200 international and national seminars/symposia/conferences, workshops. His research interests are optical waveguide technology, infrared sensors, laser induced fluorescence, chip‐based chemical and biochemical sensors, and development and application of spectroscopic techniques for the study of nanomaterials. He also focuses on the synthesis and fabrication of various organic, inorganic nanostructured materials, composites and nanosensor array echnology, broadly, nanotechnology applications for gas and liquid sensors and nanobionics (plant, fungal, microbial), nanoinnovations, nanoforensics, biodiesels, biofuels, biohydrogen, marine enzymes, algae biomass, fuel cells, biofuel cells, microbial fuel cells, bioeconomy, sustainability, gasification, algae‐based solid waste management, algal nanotechnology, sustainability science and engineering, nanocellulose, and diatoms.

Almulhim, A. I. , Ahmad, I. , Sarkar, S. , & Chavali, M. (2021). Consequences of COVID‐19 pandemic on solid waste management: Scenarios pertaining to developing countries. Remediation, 31, 111–121. 10.1002/rem.21692

Abdulaziz I. Almulhim, Imran Ahmad, Silpi Sarkar, and Murthy Chavali contributed equally to this study.

[Correction added on 27th July 2021 after first online publication: We have updated Affiliation of first Author and bios. Remove question mark in abstract after aprons, instead put full stop]

REFERENCES

  1. Abed Al Ahad, M. , Chalak, A. , Fares, S. , Mardigian, P. , & Habib, R. R. (2020). Decentralization of solid waste management services in rural Lebanon: Barriers and opportunities. Waste Management & Research: The Journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, 38(6), 639–648. 10.1177/0734242X20905115 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Abu‐Qdais, H. , Al‐Ghazo, M. , & Al‐Ghazo, E. (2020). Statistical analysis and characteristics of hospital medical waste under novel coronavirus outbreak. Global Journal of Environmental Science and Management, 6, 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  3. Ahmad, I. , Chelliapan, S. , Abdullah, N. , & Ahmad, M. D. (2019). Sanitary landfill is a solution in solid waste management or a silent threat to environment: Malaysian scenario. Open International Journal of Informatics, 7, 135–146. [Google Scholar]
  4. Alok, G. (2020). Tsunami of 1.56 billion masks triggers a new wave of marine pollution. CGTN, Environment. https://news.cgtn.com/news/2020‐12‐08/Tsunami‐of‐1‐56‐billion‐masks‐triggers‐new‐wave‐of‐marine‐pollution‐W3jOBoX5cY/index.html [Google Scholar]
  5. Asian Development Bank . (2020). Managing infectious medical waste during the COVID‐19 Pandemic. Asian Development Bank. https://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/578771/managing‐medical‐waste‐covid19.pdf [Google Scholar]
  6. Banerjee, T. (2020). A waste‐rul enterprise: COVID‐19 and India's waste management story. Degrees of change. https://www.degreesofchange.in/articles/a‐waste‐ful‐enterprise‐covid‐19‐india‐waste [Google Scholar]
  7. Bengali, S. (2020). The COVID‐19 pandemic is unleashing a tidal wave of plastic. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/world‐nation/story/2020‐06‐13/coronavirus‐pandemic‐plastic‐waste‐recycling [Google Scholar]
  8. Celis, J.‐E. , Espejo, W. , Paredes‐Osses, E. , Contreras, S. A. , Chiang, G. , & Bahamonde, P. (2021). Plastic residues produced with confirmatory testing for COVID‐19: Classification, quantification, fate, and impacts on human health. The Science of the Total Environment, 760, 144167. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144167 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) . (2020). Consolidated status report on scientific disposal of bio‐medical waste arising out of Covid‐19 treatment – Compliance of BMWM Rules, 2016 Before Hon'ble National Green Tribunal, Principal Bench. CPCB. [Google Scholar]
  10. Chaudhary, V. , Royal, A. , Chavali, M. , & Yadav, S. K. (2021). Advancements in research and development to combat COVID‐19 using Nanotechnology. Nanotechnology for Environmental Engineering, 6(1), 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  11. Chi, T. , Zhang, A. , Zhang, X. , Li, A. D. , Zhang, H. , & Zhao, Z. (2020). Characteristics of the antibiotic resistance genes in the soil of medical waste disposal sites. Science of the Total Environment, 139042. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.139042 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Danso, A. , Adomako, S. , Amankwah‐Amoah, J. , Owusu‐Agyei, S. , & Konadu, R. (2019). Environmental sustainability orientation, competitive strategy and financial performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(5), 885–895. [Google Scholar]
  13. Di Marco, M. , Baker, M. , & Daszak, P. (2020). Sustainable development must account for pandemic risk. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), 117(8), 3888–3892. 10.1073/pnas.2001655117 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Di Maria, F. , Beccaloni, E. , Bonadonna, L. , Cini, C. , Confalonieri, E. , La Rosa, G. , Maria, R. M. , Emanuela, T. , & Federica, S. (2020). Minimization of spreading of SARS‐CoV‐2 via household waste produced by subjects affected by COVID‐19 or in quarantine. The Science of the Total Environment, 743, 140803. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Ellen, I. , Mijanovich, T. , & Dillman, K. (2001). Neighborhood effects on health: Exploring the links and assessing the evidence. Journal of Urban Affairs, 23(3‐4), 391–408. [Google Scholar]
  16. Feitzelberg, R. (2020). Understanding the different types of face masks. Retrieved from https://wwd.com/fashion‐news/fashion‐scoops/understanding‐the‐different‐types‐of‐face‐masks‐1203554020/
  17. Feng, S. , Shen, C. , Xia, N. , Song, W. , Fan, M. , & Cowling, B. (2020). Rational use of face masks in the COVID‐19 pandemic. The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, 8, 434–436. https://www.thelancet.com/action/showPdf?pii=S2213‐2600%2820%2930134‐X [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Fuso, F. , Sovacool, B. , & Hughes, N. (2019). Connecting climate action with other sustainable development goals. Nature Sustainability, 2, 674–680. [Google Scholar]
  19. Gagan, K. T. , Harshit, R. , Murthy, C. , & Deepshikha, R. (2021). Nanotechnology for mitigating impact of COVID‐19. Journal of Applied Science, Engineering, Technology, and Education, 3(2), 171–180. 10.35877/454RI.asci151 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. He, Y. , Yuan, Q. , Mathieu, J. , Stadler, L. , Senehi, N. , Sun, R. , & Alvarez, P. J. (2020). Antibiotic resistance genes from livestock waste: Occurrence, dissemination, and treatment. NPJ Clean Water, 3(1), 1–11. 10.1038/s41545-020-0051-0 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Hua, J. , & Shaw, R. (2020). Coronavirus (Covid‐19) “infodemic” and emerging issues through a data lens: The case of China. International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(2309), 1–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hui, Y. , Liao, W. , Fenwei, S. , & Guang, H. (2006). Urban solid waste management in Chongqing: Challenges and opportunities. Waste Management, 26, 1052–1062. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. International Solid Waste Association . (2020). Waste Management during the COVID 19 pandemic: ISWA's recommendations.
  24. Iyer, M., Tiwari, S. , Renu, K. , Pasha, M. Y. , Pandit, S. , Singh, B. , Raj, N. , Krothapalli, S. , Kwak, H. J. , Balasubramanian, V. , Jang, S. B. , G, D. K. , Uttpal, A. , Narayanasamy, A. , Kinoshita, M. , Subramaniam, M. D. , Nachimuthu, S. K. , Roy, A. , Valsala Gopalakrishnan, A. , … Vellingiri, B. (2021). Environmental Survival of SARS‐CoV‐2–A solid waste perspective. Environmental Research, 197, 111015. 10.1016/j.envres.2021.111015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Jambeck, J. R. , Geyer, R. , Wilcox, C. , Siegler, T. R. , Perryman, M. , Andrady, A. , Narayan, R. , & Law, K. L. (2015). Plastic waste inputs from land into the ocean. Science, 347(6223), 768–771. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Jenny, Y. (2020). Where did 5,500 tonnes of discarded face masks end up? Greenpeace. https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/44629/where‐did‐5500‐tonnes‐of‐discarded‐face‐masks‐end‐up/ [Google Scholar]
  27. Kampf, G. , Todt, D. , Pfaender, S. , & Steinmann, E. (2020). Persistence of coronaviruses on inanimate surfaces and their inactivation with biocidal agents. Journal of Hospital Infection, 104, 246–251. 10.1016/j.jhin.2020.01.022 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Kitchener, J. (2020). A new type of ocean pollution: PPE. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/video/watch/idOVCHNMP9N [Google Scholar]
  29. Klemeš, J. J. , Fan, Y. V. , Tan, R. R. , & Jiang, P. (2020). Minimising the present and future plastic waste, energy and environmental footprints related to COVID‐19. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 127, 109883. 10.1016/j.rser.2020.109883 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Manikandan, N. (2020). Are social distancing, hand washing and wearing masks appropriate measures to mitigate transmission of COVID‐19? [¿Son el distanciamiento social, lavado de manos y uso de mascarilla medidas apropiadas para mitigar la transmisión de la COVID‐19?]. Vacunas (English Edition), 21(2), 136–137. 10.1016/j.vacune.2020.10.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. McKibbin, W. , & Fernando, R. (2020). The global macroeconomic impacts of covid‐19: Seven scenarios. CAMA Working Paper, Technical Report. CAMA Australian National University.
  32. Mihai, F. (2020). Assessment of COVID‐19 waste flows during the emergency state in Romania and related public health and environmental concerns. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(15), 5439 1–18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Minghua, Z. , Xiumin, F. , Rovetta, A. , Qichang, H. , Vicentini, F. , Bingkai, L. , Giusti, A. , & Yi, L. (2009). Municipal solid waste management in Pudong new area, China. Waste Management, 29(3), 1227–1233. 10.1016/j.wasman.2008.07.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Minoglou, M. , Gerassimidou, S. , & Komilis, D. (2017). Healthcare waste generation worldwide and its dependence on socio‐economic and environmental factors. Sustainability, 9(2), 220 1–13. 10.3390/su9020220 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Nsikak, U. B. , David, E. B. , & Thavamani, P. (2021). COVID pollution: impact of COVID‐19 pandemic on global plastic waste footprint. Heliyon, 7(2), e06343. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06343 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Nzeadibe, C. (2020). Solid waste management during Covid‐19 pandemic: Policy gaps and prospects for inclusive waste governance in Nigeria. Local Environment, 25(7), 527–535. [Google Scholar]
  37. Nzediegwu, C. , & Chang, S. X. (2020). Improper solid waste management increases the potential for COVID‐19 spread in developing countries. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 161, 104947. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Pan, X. , Chen, D. , Xia, Y. , Wu, X. , Li, T. , & Ou, X. (2020). Asymptomatic cases in a family cluster with SARS‐CoV‐2 infection. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 20(4), 410–4111. 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30114-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Prata, J. C. , Silva, A. L. , Walker, T. R. , Duarte, A. C. , & Rocha‐Santos, T. (2020). COVID‐19 pandemic repercussions on the use and management of plastics. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(13), 7760–7765. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Prüss‐Ustün, A. , & Corvalan, C. (2006). Preventing disease through healthy environments. Towards an estimate of the environmental burden of disease. World Health Organization. [Google Scholar]
  41. Qarani, A. S. (2020). The potential impact of COVID‐19 pandemic lockdown on environmental parameters. Recycling and Sustainable Development, 13, 49–61. [Google Scholar]
  42. Ranjan, M. R. , Tripathi, A. , & Sharma, G. (2020). Medical waste generation during COVID‐19 (SARS‐CoV‐2) pandemic and its management: An Indian perspective. Asian Journal of Environment & Ecology, 13(1), 10–15. [Google Scholar]
  43. Rao, V. V. , & Ghosh, S. K. (2020). Sustainable biomedical waste management—A case study in India, Urban Mining and Sustainable Waste Management (pp. 303–317). Springeer. [Google Scholar]
  44. Saadat, S. , Rawtani, D. , & Hussain, C. M. (2020). Environmental perspective of COVID‐19. The Science of the Total Environment, 728(1), 138870. 10.1016/jscitotenv.2020.138870 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Saar, S. , Stutz, M. , & Thomas, V. M. (2004). Towards intelligent recycling: A proposal to link bar codes to recycling information. Resources, Conservation And Recycling, 41(1), 15–22. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2003.08.006 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Sangkham, S. (2020). Face mask and medical waste disposal during the novel COVID‐19 pandemic in Asia. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering, 2, 100052. 10.1016/j.cscee.2020.100052 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Sarawut, S. (2020). Face mask and medical waste disposal during the novel COVID‐19 pandemic in Asia. Case Studies in Chemical and Environmental Engineering, 2, 100052. 10.1016/j.cscee.2020.100052 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Sarkodie, S. A. , & Owusu, P. A. (2021). Impact of COVID‐19 pandemic on waste management. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23, 7951–7960. 10.1007/s10668-020-00956-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Schnurr, R. E. , Alboiu, V. , Chaudhary, M. , Corbett, R. A. , Quanz, M. E. , Sankar, K. , Srain, H. S. , Thavarajah, V. , Xanthos, D. , & Walker, T. R. (2018). Reducing marine pollution from single‐use plastics (SUPs): A review. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 137, 157–171. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Sharma, A. K. (1998). Bio‐Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules 1998. Suvidha Law House. [Google Scholar]
  51. Suthar, S. , & Singh, P. (2015). Household solid waste generation and composition in different family size and socioeconomic groups: A case study. Sustainable Cities and Society, 14, 56–63. [Google Scholar]
  52. Thailand Environment Institute Foundation (TEI) . (2020). Plastic piles up in Thailand pandemic efforts sideline pollution fight bangkok waste up 62%. Retrieved from http://www.tei.or.th/en/highlight_detail.php?event_id=655
  53. Thailand Environment Institute Foundation (TEI) . (2020). Asia food delivery services add tonnes of plastic to Thailand's landfills during COVID‐19 Crisis. Thailand Environment Institute Foundation. [Google Scholar]
  54. The Daily Star . (2020). Poor medical waste management will increase infections. Retrieved from https://www.thedailystar.net/editorial/news/poor‐medical‐waste‐management‐will‐increase‐infections‐1909561
  55. van Doremalen, N. , Bushmaker, T. , Morris, D. H. , Holbrook, M. G. , Gamble, A. , & Williamson, B. N . (2020). Aerosol and surface stability of SARS‐CoV‐2 as compared with SARS‐CoV‐1. The New England Journal of Medicine. 382(16), 1564–1567. 10.1056/NEJMc2004973 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Van Fan, Y. , Jiang, P. , Hemzal, M. , & Klemeš, J. (2021). An update of COVID‐19 influence on waste management. Science of the Total Environment, 754, 142014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Walker, T. R . (2020). plastic pollution pandemic. Dalhousie University SSRN Papers. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3739955 or 10.2139/ssrn.3739955 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Walsh, C. , Roy, A. , Feminella, J. , Cottingham, P. , Groffman, P. , & Morgan, R. (2005). The urban stream syndrome: Current knowledge and the search for a cure. Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 24(3), 706–723. [Google Scholar]
  59. World Health Organization (WHO) (2020). Laboratory biosafety guidance related to coronavirus disease (‎COVID‐19)‎: Interim guidance. Retrieved from https://apps.who.int/iris/rest/bitstreams/1332458/retrieve
  60. World Health Organization (WHO) . (2020). Shortage of personal protective equipment endangering health workers worldwide. World Health Organization. [Google Scholar]
  61. Wu, Z. , & McGoogan, J. (2020). Characteristics of and important lessons from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) outbreak in China: Summary of a report of 72,314 cases from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Journal of the American Medical Association, 323(13), 1239–1242. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Remediation (New York, N.y.) are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES