Asbestos is considered a Public health hazard. As such there have been a number of scientific measures adopted to manage this risk to environmental health and safety. In this discussion the author would advance that the best way to manage asbestos is by applying the asbestos code designed for that particular location. It is believed to be safe since it is a code which has been researched prior to its design and many of the major risk factors were considered.
It follows distinct guides such as ‘elimination/removal (most preferred); isolation/enclosure/sealing; engineering controls; safe work practices (administrative controls); personal protective equipment (PPE) (Asbestos control measures, 2010). As it pertains to this project the risk management plan to be adopted is the elimination and removal option which would be discussed in more detail. Justification for the decision In order to justify why it is believed that the elimination and removal option is the best under any circumstances to mange asbestos risks ,the reader must understand what it really does.
First the removal has to be conducted by a certified environmentalist who is knowledgeable in the practice and would conduct the process according to the environmental heath and safety code pertaining to that procedure. Therefore, it excludes the infiltration of a novice undertaking the risk management technique. Asbestos is a very serious environmental hazard as such any attempts at control must be scientifically monitored.
As was previously mentioned these are scientific interventions which are implemented after decades of well evaluated research, ‘environmental data, community health concerns and health outcome data……. nvironmental data are reviewed to determine whether people in the community might be exposed to hazardous materials from the NPL facility. ’ (ATSDR, 2009). The removal boundaries are carefully defined; security signs and appropriate displays are erected for the public to recognize that the environment is being targeted for asbestos removal. This protects the community during the process since they would not enter the dangerous boundary zones. It is total illumination. Besides; the electrical equipment are removed and all appliances which are used to provide electrical power must be turned off.
These add to the asbestos risk when elimination and removal are done. It cannot be overemphasized that this ensures complete elimination and security after the process is completed. Hence, here is the justification that this is the best option for removing both friable and non friable asbestos. It is highly recommended as a risk management device. How will elimination and removal provide a greater amount of protection from the inherent risks associated with Asbestos? Obviously, it is irradiation of the risk itself.
It is like conducting a root cause analysis whereby the foundation of the factor is upturned to ensure that is has been destroyed completely. Isolation/enclosure/sealing; engineering controls; safe work practices (administrative controls); personal protective equipment (PPE) (Asbestos control measures, 2010) are all palliative measures. These do not stand the test of time because they act simply as control measures. There is still asbestos in the atmosphere. Of major significance is that the effects of asbestos do not manifest immediately.
It takes years. During that time no one knows how effective these control measure might be. There is never a sure way of evaluating their true effectiveness until an entire community becomes ill from this exposure which was supposed to be controlled. Therefore, it is the author’s belief that the best ways to avoid any predisposed effects and provide optimum safety is by elimination and removal. An Outline of the selected method used to evaluate results of the option chosen to implement Asbestos risk management.
The implementation task in itself offers a process of evaluation which is to determine the presence of asbestos in the air after the elimination process has been completed. This is a scientific evaluation. There are mainly three types of asbestos. Prior to the elimination procedure the environmentalist would have evaluated the types to determine whether it was white (chsorile); blue (crocidolite) or brown (amosite). The Environmental Protective Agency (EPA) has devised a scientific methodology to evaluate asbestos removal.
It has been researched and found to be an appropriate measuring instrument. This entails the adoption of an alternative test which will evaluate the removal procedure used to determine how effective it was in estimating how much asbestos was really removed. Precisely, it attempts to remove some types of asbestos harbored in buildings. The interior of the building is wet, and then demolished without excluding whatever other types of asbestos may be present. Enough water is applied to trap any asbestos which might have escaped the initial reatment.
This exercise is monitored and the amount of asbestos present in the atmosphere is evaluated. It is usually tested against a previously conducted irradiation treatment. (U. S Environmental Protection Agency. Asbestos Project Plan, 2010) This is a feasible way of evaluating the results of a previously conducted asbestos removal exercise. The environmentalists can also re-measure the asbestos content scientifically. However, this method even evaluates the specific instrument used and just not the degree of substances removed.