Brantford Expositor (February 28, 2011)
Letter to the Editor
Re: Mayor pushes energy-from-trash proposal

Dear Mayor Travale and Councillors:

I read with interest the recent article in the Brantford Expositor that talked about the proposal to build a plant to “gasify” municipal waste.

I understand municipal concerns about wanting to deal with waste in a better way than landfilling however I would urge caution about supporting this proposal as “energy from waste” technologies have many drawbacks that may not be immediately apparent.

Their proponents offer municipalities “magic bullet” solutions — take your waste, put it into our magic machine and we will make it go *poof * with no harmful effects. As the old saying goes, if something sounds too good to be true, it is.

The first law of physics states that matter cannot be created or destroyed it can only be turned into something else.

In the case of gasification, almost all of the municipal waste — 98 percent the company claims — will be turned into gas that will then be burned. This gives the impression that it has disappeared but it has not. What it means is that 98 percent of the garbage then becomes EMISSIONS, that although they can’t be seen, are creating landfills in the sky. These fine particles can then be breathed in, causing innumerable human health impacts. Do we really want to replace garbage dumps on land with garbage dumps in the air?

The incinerator/gasification companies want everyone to believe in magic, but I would rather believe in science, and the first law of physics is very clear.

Proponents of incineration/gasification also want people to believe that there is a net energy gain from their process. How can that be? They are destroying materials that can mostly be reused/recycled/composted thus forever destroying the energy that was used to make them. They are using increasing costly and harder-to-get fossil fuels to fuel their process and the energy they produce is minimal – in Sweden, where they incinerate 50% of their garbage they produce only 1% of their energy from the process.

You should also ask what the tipping fees will be. Typically incinerators/gasification plants are two to three times higher than landfill.

You should also investigate how well these plants that sound so enticing in theory have actually worked in practice. Take a good hard look at the plant built in Ottawa, that required lots of taxpayer subsidies, had cost overruns, numerous shutdowns, layoffs and many operational problems.

In a Delhi News Record article Joe Howe was quoted as saying: “This system would be running 24 hours a day, seven days a week.” Does Norfolk produce enough garbage to support this level of operation. If not, would you have to import garbage? How many trucks a day would that be and what would be the burden on local roads and infrastructure? How much greenhouse gas and emissions would the trucks produce? You should also ask about put or pay contracts that incinerator/gasification companies often have municipalities sign with large penalties if enough garbage can’t be delivered. Because of these types of contracts, Detroit’s incinerator cost it $1 billion more over two decades of operation than landfilling would have. The city recently voted to close it.

Detroit also opted to close their incinerator because an economic impact study demonstrated many more jobs and entrepreneurial opportunities would be created if a full suite of reuse, repair, recycle options were pursued.
Incinerators/gasification plants employ very few people. Could Norfolk benefit from the economic opportunities that focus on the diversion, reuse, repair, recycle and composting of waste present?

Mr. Howe also said: “We tested and looked at a lot of different technologies and this one was always heads and shoulders above the rest.” You need to ask where Elementa is operating a plant. Their website doesn’t point to anything that’s operational. Have they built a plant? What was the cost? How is it performing?

I understand the cost of waste disposal is a burden for municipalities and I am certainly not suggesting that the status quo is an acceptable answer – landfilling has numerous well documented problems — but I also urge you to go beyond the companies slick sales pitch and the eagerness of a local business to build something they have no experience in.

Waste is a complex problem that, I believe, needs complex and multi-faceted solutions. The first thing we need to do is, instead of asking how do we get rid of garbage is ask why are we generating so much of it.

Engaging in waster reduction is the first step on the road to managing waste and Federal, Provincial and local governments, as well as citizens, all have roles to play. Some strategies here include more extended producer responsibility (EPR) programs that make those who produce goods responsible for dealing with them at the end of their lifecycle. Provincial electronics recycling programs are a good example of (EPR) but there is vast room for expansion. If more producers were made responsible for post-consumer goods they would make products that were less toxic and more able to be recycled.

One of the biggest problems in landfills is the methane released from organics. 40 to 60% of all municipal waste is organics. Instituting a green bin program would significantly reduce the volume of Norfolk’s municipal waste. Halton Region increased their diversion rate from 40% to 60% through implementation of green bins. Composting organic waste also allows us to return organics to our increasing depleted soils.

These are just some of the strategies and initiatives that are part of Zero Waste. Many groups around the Ontario were excited about the Province’s promise to move us to Zero Waste with the first step of a review of the Waste Diversion Act. Many groups eagerly participated in the process only to have seen plans shelved. The Province needs to get back in the game and it would be helpful if municipalities who bear the financial costs of waste disposal put pressure on them to do so.

A coalition of 14 Ontario citizens’ groups will be meeting with staff from the Ministry of the Environment, at the invitation of Minister Wilkinson, soon to see if we can restart this process.

If I can offer you any further information about incineration/gasification or the alternatives offered by Zero Waste I would be happy to do so. If you would like to meet with me to discuss any of this it would be my pleasure.

Four years ago, as president of my organization and in conjunction with several other groups in Halton, we were successful in convincing our Region to shelve plans to build an incinerator and focus on waste diversion instead. Through that process and my subsequent involvement Provincially with the Waste Diversion Act Review I have a number of resources that may be helpful to you on this issue.

Please let me know if I can be of any help.

Liz Benneian
President
Oakvillegreen Conservation Association
Founder, the Ontario Zero Waste Coalition
905-562-3819