A new report urges Metro Vancouver not to build any new waste-to-energy plants and that its existing garbage incinerator in Burnaby be phased out.
It’s a sentiment that members of the Fraser Valley Regional District (FVRD) are echoing.
The recommendations are contained in a new study from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
Its paper titled “Closing the Loop” examines solid waste policy through the prism of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and encouraging green industries.
Author Marc Lee takes aim in part at Metro Vancouver’s advancing strategy of building a new waste-to-energy plant to consume 370,000 tonnes of garbage annually by 2018, ending the region’s use of the Cache Creek regional landfill.
The Burnaby incinerator, which burns 280,000 tonnes of waste per year, is a heavy carbon emitter, even using disputed official estimates, according to the report, making it a considerably worse source of electricity than burning natural gas.
“Incineration has adverse consequences for health and GHG emissions, and requires a steady stream of waste that is inconsistent with zero waste objectives,” the report said.
In particular, it notes plastics and paper – key materials that should be diverted for recycling – contribute the most energy when burned.
“Programs that succeed in reducing waste could, perversely, be a challenge for incinerators needing to run at high enough temperatures to reduce the formation of toxic compounds.”
Abbotsford Coun. Patricia Ross, who is vice-chair of the FVRD and a strong opponent of burning garbage, said she doesn’t know what else it will take to convince Metro to “give up on incineration,” at least in this area.
“It’s interesting, this keeps happening over and over. We keep getting confirmation from scientific and technical experts who back up our position,” said Ross, adding she is becoming frustrated with Metro.
“It doesn’t seem like the science and the facts are persuading them.”
Ross and the FVRD have been vocal that an incineration plant should not be built, especially if the emissions drift into the Fraser Valley air shed.
“We’re the recipients of their pollution.”
The new report goes on to say that, from a climate change perspective, landfilling plastics and wood products would be preferable to incineration, because it would be a form of carbon storage, even though other strategies to reduce, reuse and recycle would be better.
Incineration doesn’t make garbage disappear, the report said, noting at least 22 per cent is typically reduced to ash that still must be landfilled, while heavy metals and other toxins can escape.
“You still have to have somewhere to send your toxic ash,” said Ross who suggested more recycling and composting programs are a better solution.
She said these programs are far less costly and create more jobs than an incinerator.
Abbotsford Mayor Bruce Banman, who also sits on the FVRD board, said he was “thrilled” to hear about the report.
Banman said the idea of burning garbage so pollutants can “float down and land on the food crops that Metro Vancouver will end up eating” has never been a good idea.
He said if the incinerator is built, people will have to “keep feeding it.”
“This is just not a great idea in any shape or form. It is very short-sighted because we could end up with a solution down the road with different technology, rather than burning garbage,” said Banman.
The study admits its ultimate “closed loop” vision of a low-waste society where appliances, for example, are repaired and reused for far longer than today, is at odds with an open economy that freely allows imports and exports, as well as consumers’ penchant for quickly discarding gadgets in favour of new models.
“Meaningful progress will be difficult,” it said, but argued changes made now will be “much less painful than if we wait for nature to impose its own limits tomorrow.”
Nineteen firms are in the running to build a new waste-to-energy plant for Metro Vancouver.
Over the next two years the regional district is to determine a preferred technology and identify potential sites.
