GAIA Raises Serious Concerns regarding New York Times Article on Incineration
To the Editor, NY Times
Re: NY Times article: “Europe Finds Clean Energy in Trash, but U.S. Lags”,
4/12/2010
Dear Editor,
I would like to raise some serious concerns about yesterday's article
by
Elisabeth Rosenthal: "Europe Finds Clean Energy in Trash, but the U.S.
Lags". This piece fails to reference any credible information sources
regarding waste incineration and the risk posed by incineration
technologies.
Introducing Danish incinerators as "Far cleaner than conventional
incinerators..", the article cites the website of Ramboll
- a Danish
incinerator vendor, whose public relations department must be delighted
by such
careless reporting. In covering controversial issues where public
interest and industry practices are widely known to be in conflict, I
would
expect the NY Times to conduct more thorough research to ensure
balanced
journalism.
The following points address a range of public concern, which Ms.
Rosenthal has
failed to examine.
For decades the tobacco industry told us that cigarettes were safe. Now
the
waste incineration industry wants us to believe they are coming clean?
Despite the latest industry spin, there is nothing better about burning
garbage
today, whether in the U.S.
or in Denmark
(1). Attempts to peddle “waste to energy” haven’t gained wide
acceptance around
the world because people are growing increasingly aware that:
1. Incineration
poses a serious threat to public health.
Burning garbage is a primary source of cancer-causing dioxins and other
pollutants that enter the food supply and concentrate up through the
food
chain. Installing of scrubbers and filters to reduce the smokestack
emissions
only serves to increase the amount of residual fly ash that needs to be
disposed in landfills, contaminating groundwater and generating similar
risk.
2. Incineration produces more carbon dioxide (CO2) per unit
of electricity generated than coal power plants (2). Current
atmospheric carbon
loads cannot safely bear additional emissions
from
incinerators and landfills. Howevere, zero waste practices such as recycling and composting has the potential of
mitigating up to
42 % of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
3. Incineration represents a massive waste of energy. Due to
its low calorific value, burning garbage to produce energy is highly
inefficient (3). Conversely, recycling
recovers three to five times more energy than incineration produces.
4. Incineration creates an economic burden for communities.
Billions of taxpayer dollars are spent subsidizing the construction and
operations of incinerators. For a
fraction of this cost, investments in recycle, reuse
and remanufacture, create significantly more business and employment
opportunity.
5. Incineration represents the destruction of valuable
resources and jobs. Zero
waste practices create over 10 times the number of jobs than burning or
burying
the same waste. Over ninety per cent of municipal solid waste in
the U.S. can be
recycled, re-used or composted, to create thousands of long-term,
family-supporting jobs and community resilience.
As part of their marketing efforts, incinerator
industry lobby groups have even recruited the same “expert” witnesses
that once
testified for the tobacco industry. Fortunately, citizen groups
today
are not easily deceived by such masquerades and are familiar with the
real
solutions.
The next time the NY Times looks at gleaning information from industry
websites, I would encourage your colleagues to diligently question the
source.
For more information on waste incineration and the latest reports on
the
economic, public health and environmental risk associated with
incinerator
technologies, please check our website
or contact me directly.
Respectfully,
Ananda Lee Tan
North American Program Coordinator
Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives
1958 University Avenue, Berkeley, Ca 94703
Phone: +1 510 883 9490 Ext 102
Email: ananda(at)no-burn.org
Website: www.no-burn.org
Footnotes:
1. According to Eurostat in 2007, Denmark produces the highest waste
per capita (over 1762 lbs. per person each year) in the EU – clearly an
unsustainable level of waste generation. Additionally, over 80 % of
what is
burned in Danish incinerators is recyclable/compostable.
2. http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/affect/air-emissions.html
3. State of the art incineration plants in Denmark achieve only 25%
energy
efficiency with heat and power
