Course Ruler

MBA600 | The Interceptor Project for Preventing Plastic Waste from Reaching the Ocean

Introduction

The interceptor project aims at preventing plastic waste from reaching the ocean. With the increasing focus on water conservation, this project will play a leading role in protecting water borides as well as aquatic life. It is essential to consider ethical and regulatory aspects related to the project as a measure to ensure that the project is compliant and reliable. This report assesses the ethical and regulatory considerations for the interceptor project. The regulatory aspects majorly focus on the Australian requirements for projects of this magnitude and nature. Also, the report highlights the viability of the project with justified recommendations based on the theories and concepts of project management.

Assessment of the ethical and regulatory considerations

One of the ethical issues is unrealistic expectations from the stakeholders, mainly relating to the impact of the interceptor. In this case, the interceptor is expected to prevent the entry of plastic and other waste materials into the ocean. However, the project may not fully prevent plastic and other materials from reaching the ocean due to multiple factors. An assessment of the feasibility of a similar project in 2014 revealed that it would be unable to capture smaller, deeper plastic particles that could harm wildlife (Ocean, 2019). In such a case, the interceptor may not achieve the intended expectations. Also, the harm that would be attributable to the wildlife can affect the cost-benefit of the interceptor at Brisbane River. One of the expected benefits of the project is that it will protect marine wildlife by preventing plastic and other waste materials from entering the ocean. However, this expectation may not be fully achieved since the interceptor may be unable to capture smaller and deeper plastic particles.

The issue of unrealistic expectations from the stakeholders can be monitored by carrying out an appropriate feasibility study on the project. The feasibility study should focus on the benefits and the cost of the project by referring to similar projects that are already operational in different parts of the world. The project team can carry out a benchmark of a similar project and assess its objectives and downfalls. A proper report of the feasibility study will enable the report team to present clear expectations related to the project. As a result, the stakeholders will be fully aware of the project’s effectiveness and downfalls; thus preventing ethical issues that could have resulted from lack of proper knowledge of the expectations.

Accountability is another essential ethical consequence in project risk-taking. When things go wrong, it is more likely for the human nature to try to avoid consequences and place the blame on someone or something else. Project team members should ensure that they own their mistakes and ensure that they meet their responsibilities. Each project stakeholder should be responsible for their roles and activities to promote accountability. It is essential to ensure that each project team member knows their responsibility and that they will be accountable when errors occur. The issue of accountability can be monitored by assigning duties and responsibilities to project team members. Mac Donald et al. (2020) assert that the delegation of responsibility and the demand for an account of the execution of that responsibility establishes an accountability relationship. Similarly, the project team members should establish an accountability relationship by delegating responsibility. In the long run, the project team will prevent issues of accountability and related risks.  

Health and safety concerns are another crucial ethical consequence that is associated with the project. The pressure to complete the project may lead to health and safety concerns at the project site. In this case, safety standards should be implemented in potentially hazardous situations. According to SafeWork Australia, the key steps to monitoring and managing health and safety concerns involve identifying hazards, assessing the risks, controlling the risks, and reviewing control measures (SafeWork, 2012). Some of the hazards for this project may include the collapse of structures and falling objects such as tools and debris during the installation of the interceptor. A report by the IMCA shows that one person was killed and the other injured during the installation of the Maersk Interceptor. The incident occurred during the lifting and installation of a seawater pump when one worker fell into the sea and died while the other was seriously injured. The investigations by the Norwegian Petroleum Safety Authority showed that regulatory issues were identified as major contributors to the incident (IMCA, 2018). The project team for the installation of the interceptor in Brisbane River should consider the health and safety of the worker as a crucial ethical concern. It is essential to focus on the regulatory aspects of Queensland State or the Australian commonwealth.

According to Safe Work Queensland, each project should implement the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011. Division 5 of the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 provides the guidelines on the provision to workers and use of personal protective equipment (Legislation, 2011). The project team should ensure that all workers have protective equipment during the installation of the interceptor. The provision of protective equipment to the workers is one of the ways for monitoring the health and safety concerns of the workers. Besides protective equipment, the regulations provide that project stakeholders should manage risks to health and safety by identifying hazardous situations and controlling associated risks.

Queensland Development Code on sustainable buildings is another regulatory concern for the project. One of the provisions of the Queensland Development Code is the energy efficiency of sustainable buildings. In addition to this, the code provides that such buildings should achieve a software rating of at least 4.5 stars plus a nominal credit obtained under the Development Code to achieve 6 stars. Acceptable solutions will include installing solar power systems for the interceptor and ensuring that the project is powered by clean energy. With the inclusion of clean solar energy in the project, the interceptor will achieve the requirements of the Queensland Development Code on sustainable buildings. An efficient installation of solar energy on the interceptor will significantly reduce the cost of operating the interceptor, hence achieving the cost-effectiveness of the project.

Viability of the project with justified recommendations

Project viability can be determined by the likelihood of a project being successfully developed and providing the intended product or service. Depending on the nature of the project, economic and environmental viability is essential in assessing the effectiveness of a project. In the case of the interceptor project, its environmental and economic benefits can be attributable to its viability. A recent news report by Reuters shows that the Ocean Cleanup targets to clear 90% of floating plastic from the world’s oceans by 2014. With the funding from leading donors and corporations such as Coca-Cola, the company had an asset base of $51 million at the end of 2020. A strong asset base and increased partnership with companies such as Maersk will enable Ocean Cleanup to achieve its goal of clearing floating plastic in the world’s leading waterbodies. The Queensland government and other project stakeholders should focus on the capability of the Ocean Cleanup to assess the viability of the interceptor project. The availability of funding and partnership from leading multinational organisations shows that Ocean Cleanup is a reliable partner and that there is a high likelihood of successful installation of the interceptor.

The viability of the project can also be determined by assessing the amount of plastic debris that the interceptor can collect within a given period. After 120 hours of installation of System 002, the Ocean Cleanup spokesperson Joost Dubois reported that the system scooped up 8.2 tonnes of plastic, which was more than the company’s estimates (Dickie, 2021). Such reports show that the interceptor is capable of scooping a large amount of plastic, hence it is more likely to prevent a large amount of waste from reaching the ocean. The interceptor will help the Queensland government to meet its plastic waste collection after a shorter period.

According to Queensland’s plastic pollution reduction plan, at least 8 million tonnes of plastic leak into the ocean each year. The stage government has already supported three projects under the roadmap to recover and recycle 6,300 tonnes per year (Queensland, 2021). With the capacity of the interceptor to collect a large amount of plastic waste each day, the project will be viable for reducing the cost of plastic waste collection. Based on the 8.2 tonnes of waste scooped by System 002 in 120 hours, the following table summarises the amount of waste that the interceptor would be able to scoop in one year. The table is based on the assumption that the interceptor will work 24 hours a day and seven days a week.

Based on the estimates, only one interceptor will be able to collect approximately 596.96 tonnes each year. The capacity of the interceptor will play a leading role in collecting plastic waste and preventing the debris from reaching the ocean. These estimates show that installing more than one interceptor in different rivers would play a leading role in reducing the amount of plastic waste entering the ocean each year. In addition to the capacity of the interceptor, it is more sustainable because it is powered by solar energy. The interceptor will not require an additional cost of energy such as electricity or fuel due to the availability of solar power. Based on the current market situation, many organisations and focusing on sustainable practices of production and service delivery. Installation of the interceptor will play a crucial role in promoting sustainability in multiple ways. Besides, the use of solar energy, the project will also enhance sustainability by promoting the recycling of plastic materials.

A report on recycling and waste in Queensland indicates that the overall recovery rate for headline waste was 48.7%; 80% of the recovered materials were recycled. The findings also show that most of the materials were recovered from commercial and industrial waste (Queensland, 2019). The interceptor project will enable the state government to increase the recovery rate by a significant percentage. With an increased collection of waste materials from Brisbane River, Queensland will be more likely to increase the recovery rate for commercial and industrial plastic waste. In the long run, increased collection of plastic materials will increase the recycling of the materials. These benefits are attributable to the installation of the interceptor.

To achieve the project objectives, the project stakeholders should partner with leading organisations that promote environmental protection. The state government should engage the Ocean Cleanup and other partners to ensure that the project objectives are achieved appropriately. Partners such as environmental conservation organisation can help in financing the project and ensuring that it is viable in the long run. The project team should also liaise with the community to ensure that there is reduced dumping of plastic waste in the ocean. It is also essential to engage the plastic packaging producers to ensure that there are fewer plastics disposed into the environment.

Notably, the interceptor will only be able to collect plastic waste that is already present in the environment. Increased production and disposal of plastic materials into the rivers would not be a good approach despite the installation of the interceptor. The state government should enact regulations that prevent single-use plastics and offer alternatives to the packaging industry. Effective regulations will prevent the use and disposal of plastic waste that may find reach the rivers and oceans. The government should enter into agreements with plastic producers to lower the cost of plastic collection and recycling. In addition to this, the state government should also create awareness of effective methods of disposing of plastic items to prevent them from reaching the water bodies.

Based on the classical model, the project stakeholders should make decisions based on the availability of information about the effectiveness and risks associated with the interceptor. The classical model of decision-making assumes that decisions should be made rationally based on the available information (Hoy, 2019). In this case, there is a clearly defined problem, a certain environment, and complete information about the interceptor. The information provided in this report shows that the interceptor will significantly help in the collection of plastic waste and prevent it from reaching the ocean. The sustainability of the interceptor is also essential for decision-making.

Conclusion

The report provides more information about the interceptor including its benefit, associated risks, and effectiveness. With the capacity of scooping 8.2 tonnes of waste in 120 hours, the interceptor will be able to collect approximately 596.96 tonnes each year. The project also aligns with the Queensland Developed Code on sustainability buildings because it will be powered by solar energy. Based on the availability of information about the project, the project stakeholders should use the classical model to make an appropriate decision. An appropriate decision would be to install the interceptor.

References

Dickie, G., 2021. Ocean Cleanup struggles to fulfill promise to scoop up plastic at sea. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/ocean-cleanup-struggles-fulfill-promise-scoop-up-plastic-sea-2021-09-16/

Hoy, W., 2019. Decision-Making Theory 7. https://www.waynekhoy.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Theory-of-Decison-Making.pdf

Legislation. 2011. Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011. https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/pdf/inforce/current/sl-2011-0240

IMCA. 2018. Fatal injury during lifting operations- Maerk Interceptor. https://www.imca-int.com/safety-events/fatal-injury-during-lifting-operations-maersk-interceptor/

Mac Donald, K., Rezania, D., Baker, R., 2020. A grounded theory examination of project managers’ accountability. International Journal of Project Management 38, 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.09.008

Ocean. 2019. The pros and cons of blue teach in tackling marine plastic waste. https://ocean.economist.com/innovation/articles/the-pros-and-cons-of-blue-tech-in-tackling-marine-plastic-waste

Queensland, W.H. and S., 2016. Safe work method statements [WWW Document]. URL https://www.worksafe.qld.gov.au/resources/guides/safe-work-method-statements

Queensland. G . 2019. Recycling and waste in Queensland. https://www.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0033/129669/recycling-waste-report-2019.pdf

Queensland, G. 2021. Tracking plastic waste. Queensland’s Plastic Pollution Reduction Plan. https://www.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0022/113368/plastic-pollution-reduction-plan.pdf

Safe Work Australia. 2012. Construction Work. https://www.safeworkaustralia.gov.au/system/files/documents/1705/mcop-construction-work-v1.pdf