A major concern of those who oppose the incineration initiative deals with emission of disease causing dioxins and other pollutants that can potentially enter the food and water supply. This issue which may have had legitimacy in the past has been nearly entirely eliminated with the improvement in modern technology. The federal government has issued a requirement that all ash be tested for toxicity before it leaves the plant. Modern plants more than meet requirements, and as a result, all threats of hazardous material being emitted are essentially negated.
Another prevalent argument held by opponents of incineration it is that it is a significant waste of energy; the low colorific value of burning waste to energy makes it ultimately and inefficient method of trash disposal.
A major reason that building of incinerator plants are shut down deals with discouragement or composting efforts. This is in fact a false misconception. Waste-to-energy plants hold that recycling is an essential part of the energy conservation process, and that they are ultimately in competition with landfills. Recycling is by far the most efficient method of waste management, but expecting everyone to recycle considering the cost of doing so, is unrealistic.
Compared to landfilling, incineration offers considerable energy conservation benefits. Until our country becomes much more efficient at recycling and can progress in the zero waste initiative, these plants offer us the best possible solution to waste disposal.
Matt, I appreciate your points here, but I'd like to see evidence in support of what you are saying about the toxicity of the emissions and ash. To my knowledge, the EPA does not require detailed characterization of the ash material. It may be that I am mistaken. Please provide links to the requirements that you refer to in your post.
ReplyDeleteHere was the link I was referring to in my post from the National Academies Press that gives a detailed breakdown of EPA regulations in regard to waste incinerator emissions.
Deletehttp://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=5803&page=186
After reading over some of these regulations for a second time and searching responses and critiques of these standards in place, I could see that there are indeed some areas of uncertainty in relation to potential exposure risks. I was mistaken in saying that a detailed breakdown of the ash is required by the EPA, but I still believe that the standards in place are sufficient preventing toxic exposure. There remains a potential possibility of hazardous exposure, but there isn't really any way for this risk to be completely eliminated. Ultimately I feel that the risk of exposure is low enough that the energy benefits of incineration still outweigh that of landfills.
Here was the link I was referring to in my post from the National Academies Press that gives a detailed breakdown of EPA regulations in regard to waste incinerator emissions.
Deletehttp://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=5803&page=186
After reading over some of these regulations for a second time and searching responses and critiques of these standards in place, I could see that there are indeed some areas of uncertainty in relation to potential exposure risks. I was mistaken in saying that a detailed breakdown of the ash is required by the EPA, but I still believe that the standards in place are sufficient preventing toxic exposure. There remains a potential possibility of hazardous exposure, but there isn't really any way for this risk to be completely eliminated. Ultimately I feel that the risk of exposure is low enough that the energy benefits of incineration still outweigh that of landfills.
I believe that incinerators, such as the ones at Covanta, are good because they help create clean renewable energy to run their company. This way they save money on electricity. Plus, with the hundreds of tons of trash that come in, they are able to reduce the total amount by 3/4. Only 1/4 of the original trash ends up in the landfill. The only bad thing about them is that they use an unimaginable amount of water to run. I believe that it is ok to have incinerators, but landfills are still ok as long as the methanol levels stay low.
ReplyDelete