Editorial: Time to reconsider incineration of wastes
October 15, 2014 at 11:02
October 11, 2014
In 1999, Congress enacted the Clean Air Act banning the incineration of municipal, bio-medical, and hazardous wastes which emit poisonous and toxic fumes. In 2002, the Supreme Court clarified that the Act does not absolutely prohibit incineration as a mode of waste disposal, only those burning processes that emit toxic fumes.
With the country’s incinerators unable to meet the standards set by the law, the accumulated garbage of towns and cities went to dumpsites and landfills. Smokey Mountain in Manila became notorious as a center of urban pollution until 1993 when it was effectively closed down with the building of a low-cost housing project on top of it. Quezon City built its own mountain of garbage in Payatas which collapsed in 2000, killing 218 people, with 300 missing. Landfills proliferated in provinces around Metro Manila, creating business for local governments, but condemned by the local residents.
Garbage has long been a problem for Metro Manila. Non-biodegradeable plastic trash – mostly food and grocery bags – clog the area’s drainage system, resulting in floods and traffic jams with every rain. This is principally what has moved Metropolitan Manila Development Authority (MMDA) Chairman Francis Tolentino to push for the use of incinerators to get rid of the garbage produced by Metro Manila’s 12-million population.
Since 1999 when the Clean Air Act was passed, considerable progress has been made worldwide in the use of incinerators. From 1996 to 2007, no new incinerators were built in the United States, but scores of new ones have been built in the last few years, equipped with recovery technology that allows the reuse of certain materials and the production of electrical energy. In 2008, the United Kingdom drew up plans for about 100 sites for new plants.
Modern incinerators are now able to reduce the poisonous fumes produced by the old ones through high temperatures that break down the dioxin and furan emissions, which are considered serious health hazards. They are able to control odor pollution as well. Fine particles that could escape into the air can be removed with filters. Moreover, incinerator plants can generate electricity as well as biomass from organic waste which qualifies as renewable energy. In contrast, landfills generate methane and tremendous amounts of carbon dioxide which contribute to global warming.
Today, many European nations rely heavily on waste incineration, including France, Germany, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. Denmark and Sweden have long been using energy generated from incineration. This system of waste disposal is popular in Japan which does not have much land available for landfills.
It is said that in the waste hierarchy, the best is still prevention, followed by minimization, reuse, and recycling. Efforts to promote these practices, particularly reuse and recycling, must continue. But with the sheer volume of garbage that we are now producing and the new technology now available, it is time to reexamine and consider incineration as proposed by Chairman Tolentino.
Source: https://www.mb.com.ph/editorial-time-to-reconsider-incineration-of-wastes/
