Medical Waste Classification & Pre-Treatment Comparison Europe vs China vs Africa
Medical Waste Classification & Pre-Treatment Comparison
(Europe vs China vs Africa)
| Item | Europe (EU developed countries) | China (typical situation) | Africa (many developing countries) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Classification system | Strict source segregation: infectious, sharps, pharmaceutical, and chemical waste collected separately | Classification required by law, but weak enforcement; often mixed in practice | Some hospitals segregate, but most waste is collected mixed |
| Sharps (needles, blades) | Collected in rigid sharps boxes → incinerated separately | Mostly in sharps boxes, but often bagged together with other waste | Frequently mixed with other waste; sharps boxes often unavailable |
| Plastic waste (syringes, IV sets, infusion bags) | Mostly drained, compressed; some recycled or treated by pyrolysis, not all go to incineration | Usually mixed with other waste, high moisture content | Rarely drained; infusion bags with liquid often incinerated directly |
| Infectious waste (gauze, cotton, gloves) | Collected separately → dried before incineration | Classified, but often mixed with plastics and sharps | Little classification; usually mixed together |
| Pharmaceutical/chemical waste | Not burned in medical waste incinerators; sent to hazardous waste facilities or cement kilns | Sometimes co-incinerated with medical waste | Often mixed and burned with medical waste; poor management |
| Moisture content | Low (often drained, 10C20%) | Higher (20C40%, infusion bag residues common) | Very high (30C50%, often blood/IV liquid residues) |
| Chlorine content (PVC ratio) | Well controlled; PVC proportion low | Relatively high; significant chlorine source in waste | High and uncontrolled |
| Waste characteristics entering incinerator | Relatively uniform: sharps boxes, plastics, gauze | Complex mix: plastics, infusion bags, sharps, gauze | Wet, chlorine-rich, highly mixed |
| Requirements for incinerators | Stable incineration; secondary chamber sufficient to meet EU standards | Must strengthen flue gas treatment: quenching + alkaline scrubber + activated carbon + bag filter | Often lacking complete flue gas systems; difficult to maintain compliance |
| Dioxin risk | Low (because waste composition is controlled) | High (chlorine + moisture + complex feed) | High (poor management + incomplete combustion) |
Key Takeaways
-
European incinerators appear “simpler” because front-end segregation ensures stable waste characteristics and combustion loads.
-
China and Africa face different realities: waste streams are more complex, with higher moisture and chlorine content, requiring more advanced flue gas treatment (rapid quenching, wet scrubbers, activated carbon, bag filters).
-
HICLOVER’s design advantage lies in accounting for these non-ideal waste streams, ensuring customers can still achieve international emission standards even when waste segregation is poor and composition is complex.
