Clear The Air News Blog Rotating Header Image

Incineration – Solid Waste Disposal

Study could derail incinerator projects, experts warn

Jan 13th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.mrw.co.uk/news/study-could-derail-incinerator-projects-experts-warn/8624768.article

13 Jan 2012

http://www.mrw.co.uk/pictures/586xAny/0/5/1/1276051_incinerator.jpg

A Government-backed study into the potential health risks posed by incinerators could derail a raft of key projects, experts warned ahead of a crucial ministerial decision on a proposed energy-from-waste plant in Norfolk.

The Health Protection Agency (HPA) confirmed it was working with scientists to draw up “detailed proposals” for a study into birth outcomes around waste incinerators.

Campaigners against the £500m King’s Lynn power and recycling facility said ministers should wait until such a study was completed before deciding whether to back the proposals.

While this is thought to be unlikely, industry figures said uncertainty about the HPA’s stance could make it harder to get incinerators through planning.

Grant Thornton director Nigel Mattravers said: “It is disappoint-ing. Previous [Government-backed studies] were largely thought to definitively prove there are no serious health problems.

“It may not be helpful for the future if there is a piece of work which campaigners can say ‘we need to wait for this before a decision is taken’.”

Mike Knights from Farmers Campaign, which opposes the Norfolk incinerator, said a number of scientific studies, including one in the well-regarded US National Library of Medicine in July 2010, cited links between health problems and incinerators.

“I think studies like that one in the US are making the HPA feel uncomfortable. The industry seems to think that the Waste Incinerator Directive wiped the slate clean. It doesn’t.”

The HPA, a non-departmental public body, refused to say when a decision would be taken on the study, first floated last May, or how long it would take if it went ahead.

A spokesman said: “The HPA’s position is that well run and regulated modern municipal waste incinerators are not a significant risk to public health.

“However, we recognise that there are real public concerns about this issue, and will take every possible step to reassure people that the position is as we have outlined.”

He added that discussions were ongoing with Imperial College London about “a potential study into birth outcomes around municipal waste incinerators and a detailed proposal for what would be a complex study is being drawn up”.

In 2009, the HPA declared that incinerators posed a significantly low threat to public health (mrw.co.uk/3005813.article).

Burning rubbish not the answer

Jan 13th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

South China Morning Post

The news from the Civic Exchange think tank on the environment makes for frightening reading (“HK lags behind Beijing on air pollution: lobby”, January 13).

How can the Environmental Protection Department justify itself ? Who will be held accountable for its incompetence? The facts are that these officials continue to hold their highly-paid jobs at our expense, while failing utterly to fulfil stated policies and deliberately misleading the public.

Why are our air quality targets set low? Could it be an arrangement to suit the grand infrastructure schemes that this government is hell-bent upon?

A child can see that the construction of a giant bridge, a third airport runway, a mega-railway – and all the ensuing heavy traffic – will add to the air pollution. Hong Kong’s public will choke while big developers and construction businesses benefit on a huge scale. To compound the folly, the department wants to build a super-incinerator as a way of dealing with Hong Kong’s rubbish.

Burning rubbish is an outdated solution that adds dioxins to the air. We know only too well that we simply cannot afford to add to the city’s toxic load. We also know that dioxins don’t “blow away”, as the department tells us.

Breathable air is a basic citizens’ right. We are being cheated by a government and its vested businesses, who put misguided projects above people’s health. It’s time for a comprehensive policy and planning rethink.

Julia Brown, Lantau

Dioxin concentrations in the blood of workers at municipal waste incinerators.

Jan 10th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://oem.bmj.com/content/52/6/385.abstract

1. A Schecter,

2. O Päpke,

3. M Ball,

4. A Lis,

5. P Brandt-Rauf

+ Author Affiliations

1.      Department of Preventive Medicine, State University of New York, Binghamton 13903, USA.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES–Increased concentrations of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs) and polychlorinated dibenzo-furans (PCDFs) in pooled blood samples from workers at municipal waste incinerators have been reported. This study was undertaken to confirm these results in individual blood samples from potentially exposed and unexposed workers at municipal waste incinerators compared with matched unexposed controls and compared with concentrations in the slag and fly ash from the municipal waste incinerators. METHODS–Concentrations of PCDDs and PCDFs were determined in the blood of 10 workers from an old municipal waste incinerator without adequate pollution controls, 11 workers from a newer incinerator with modern pollution controls, and 25 controls from the general population group matched for age (+/- 10 years), sex, and race, and in the slag and fly ash from the older incinerator. RESULTS–Significant increases of certain PCDDs and PCDFs were found in the blood of the workers from the older incinerator compared with the controls as follows: octaCDD (1051 (438) v 637 (344), P < 0.001), hexaCDF (52.3 (28.7) v 30.2 (18.2), P < 0.01), heptaCDF (43.9 (30.4) v 22.7 (12.4), P < 0.001), total PCDDs (1262 (484) v 825 (454), P < 0.001), total PCDFs (133.0 (68.1) v 93.7 (36.7), P < 0.05), and total PCDD/Fs (1395 (537) v 918 (437), P < 0.001). The workers from the older incinerator with the greatest exposure were found to have the most significant increases of the blood PCDDs and PCDFs, and the pattern of increased PCDD and PCDF congeners in the blood corresponded to the pattern in the incinerator slag and ash. No significant differences were found between the blood concentrations of the workers at the newer incinerator and the controls. CONCLUSION–Occupational exposure to slag and fly ash from municipal waste incinerators may increase the blood concentrations of PCDDs and PCDFs. Modern pollution control technology in new incinerators may be able to minimise potential exposure to slag and fly ash and thus the absorption of PCDDs and PCDFs from this source.

Articles citing this article

Does long term residency near industry have an impact on the body burden of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins, furans, and polychlorinated biphenyls in older women? Occup. Environ. Med. 2005;62:895-901

o   [Abstract]

o   [Full text]

o   [PDF]

Associations between oxidative stress levels and total duration of engagement in jobs with exposure to fly ash among workers at municipal solid waste incinerators Mutagenesis 2003;18:533-537

o   [Abstract]

o   [Full text]

o   [PDF]

Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin and dibenzofuran concentrations in serum samples of workers at intermittently burning municipal waste incinerators in Japan Occup. Environ. Med. 2002;59:362-368

o   [Abstract]

o   [Full text]

o   [PDF]

In Utero and Lactational Exposure to 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin and 2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran Reduces Growth and Disrupts Reproductive Parameters in Female Rats Biol. Reprod.2002;66:1621-1626

o   [Abstract]

o   [Full text]

o   [PDF]

Polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin and dibenzofuran concentrations in the serum samples of workers at continuously burning municipal waste incinerators in Japan Occup. Environ. Med. 2000;57:204-210

o   [Abstract]

o   [Full text]

This Article

Maternal residence near municipal waste incinerators and the risk of urinary tract birth defects

Jan 10th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://oem.bmj.com/content/67/7/493.abstract

1. Sylvaine Cordier1,

2. Anne Lehébel1,

3. Emmanuelle Amar2,

4. Lucie Anzivino-Viricel3,

5. Martine Hours3,

6. Christine Monfort1,

7. Cécile Chevrier1,

8. Mireille Chiron3,

9. Elisabeth Robert-Gnansia2

+ Author Affiliations

1.      1INSERM U625; IFR-140; Université Rennes I, Campus de Beaulieu, Rennes, France
2.      2Registre des Malformations en Rhône-Alpes, Lyon, France
3.      3UMRESTTE UMR T 9405; Inrets; Université Lyon I; InVS; Bron, France

1.      Correspondence to Sylvaine Cordier, INSERM, U625, Université Rennes I, Campus de Beaulieu, 35 042 Rennes Cedex, France; sylvaine.cordier@rennes.inserm.fr

Received 8 October 2009

Revised 5 February 2010

Accepted 18 February 2010

Abstract

Objectives Waste incineration releases a mixture of chemicals with high embryotoxic potential, including heavy metals and dioxins/furans, into the atmosphere. In a previous ecological study we found an association between the risk of urinary tract birth defects and residence in the vicinity of municipal solid waste incinerators (MSWIs). The objective of the present study was to specifically test this association.

Methods A population-based case–control study compared 304 infants with urinary tract birth defects diagnosed in the Rhône-Alpes region (2001–2003) with a random sample of 226 population controls frequency-matched for infant sex and year and district of birth. Exposure to dioxins in early pregnancy at the place of residence, used as a tracer of the mixture released by 21 active waste incinerators, was predicted with second-generation Gaussian modelling (ADMS3 software). Other industrial emissions of dioxins, population density and neighbourhood deprivation were also assessed. Individual risk factors including consumption of local food were obtained by interviews with 62% of the case and all control families.

Results Risk was increased for mothers exposed to dioxins above the median at the beginning of pregnancy (OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.47 to 5.92 for dioxin deposits). When only interviewed cases were considered, risk estimates decreased mainly because the non-interviewed cases were more likely to live in exposed residential environments (OR 2.05, 95% CI 0.92 to 4.57). The results suggest that consumption of local food modifies this risk.

Conclusions This study confirms our previous observation of a link between the risk of urinary tract birth defects and exposure to MSWI emissions in early pregnancy and illustrates the effect of participation bias on risk estimates of environmental health impacts.

Footnotes

Linked articles 054635.

Funding This study was funded by grants from ADEME (Agence de l’Environnement et de la Maitrise de l’Energie) and from AFSSET (Agence Française de Sécurité Sanitaire de l’Environnement et du Travail) in France.

Competing interests None.

Ethics approval This study was conducted with the approval of the Commission Nationale sur l’Informatique et les Libertés (CNIL) and the Comité Consultatif sur le Traitement de l’Information en Matière de Recherche (CCTIRS).

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Related articles

Commentary: Incinerators, birth defects and the legacy of Thomas Bayes

o   David Kriebel

Occup Environ Med 2010;67:433-434 doi:10.1136/oem.2009.054635

o   [Extract]

o   [Full text]

o   [PDF]

Incineration and human health

Jan 9th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

Download PDF : 4380

Beautiful island should be developed for recreational use, not for incinerator

Jan 9th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

South China Morning Post – Jan 9, 2012

I agree with Craig Colbran’s letter (“Incinerator is a bad way to burn money”, December 30).

The Environmental Protection Department does almost nothing for the taxpaying public. My name for it has been, for some years, the Environmental Polluting Department and I think the title fits.

I recently wrote to the department to express my opposition to the plan to build an incinerator at Shek Kwu Chau.

I first visited the island in 1968 to see the superintendent of the Society for the Aid and Rehabilitation of Drug Abusers’ (Sarda), drug rehabilitation centre.

We agreed that what was most suitable was to develop the island for recreational use and for tourists, but that the Sarda centre would have to be relocated.

Building an incinerator at Shek Kwu Chau would be irresponsible. It would lead to the destruction of an asset of great natural beauty. I gather that the estimated cost of the project would be far more than the cost of building the same facility at the Tsang Tsui ash lagoons in Tuen Mun. I have walked in the area where these lagoons are located and feel that if Hong Kong must have this type of incinerator, then Tsang Tsui would be a far better location and, as I understand it from the limited information available, a lot cheaper.

I visited a modern incinerator on the outskirts of Tokyo, only a few kilometres from Tokyo Disneyland, and was most impressed by its layout and the cleanliness. Hong Kong should consider adopting a similar design, although we would have to adopt a better system of separation of rubbish.

The rigorous system in operation throughout Japan is something that the Hong Kong government should introduce. In this regard the Environmental Protection Department can take a leading role.

Several years ago, I noted the clean way in which rubbish was separated in Japan for collection. I felt it was the only country in the world with what I would call gift-wrapped garbage.

I believe that achieving something similar when it comes to waste separation in the SAR is more important than building a super-incinerator.

Shek Kwu Chau is a pearl in the chain of precious islands to the south of Lantau. It must be saved from senseless and wanton destruction.

Gordon Andreassend, Tai Kok Tsui

Push for levy on rubbish disposal

Jan 9th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

South China Morning Post – 9 Jan 2012

Households would pay for what they throw away under government proposal to cope with waste

The government’s latest attempt to limit the immense amount of waste generated by Hongkongers is due to begin shortly, with a public consultation to gauge the public’s appetite for paying a rubbish disposal fee.

The consultation document, due to be released this week, will explain the purpose and methods of levying a fee for collecting and disposing of rubbish – although it’s probably too early to suggest an exact fee level, according to a person familiar with the situation. “The issue goes well beyond how much will be charged,” the person said. “It is also about overhauling the way people handle their household waste.”

The consultation document will highlight different ways of charging – including a fee based on the volume of rubbish discarded or a fixed fee like government rates. The latter, however, provides little incentive for people to cut back on their rubbish.

Taipei and South Korea, among other places, have cut their disposed waste by up to half by charging for garbage bags. In Taipei, a five-litre bag costs 58 HK cents.

A survey in 2009 by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development found Hongkongers were the most wasteful among 30 economies surveyed, producing twice as much rubbish per capita (921kg) as people in Japan (410kg) and South Korea (380kg).

Officials hope a dumping fee will give residents an incentive to separate their rubbish before disposal. There is no law in Hong Kong requiring people to do so.

One thorny issue to be tackled is how to prevent illegal waste dumping after a charge is introduced. Another question is whether streets should continue to have rubbish bins, where people might dump waste to avoid the charge. Any changes would also have to address whether waste collection officers should be authorised to refuse to handle rubbish that has not been dealt with in the right way.

The city disposes of an average of about 3.3 million tonnes of solid waste – excluding construction waste, for which charges are levied – in landfills every year. But the landfills will be full within this decade.

About one-third of the rubbish, or 3,000 tonnes a day, is kitchen and food waste.

Currently, the public does not pay directly for dumped rubbish; the expense, up to an estimated HK$1.8 billion per year, is borne largely by the government.

It costs the Environmental Protection Department HK$337 per tonne, or 33 cents per kilogram, to haul rubbish from waste transfer stations to landfills. The figure rises to HK$549 per tonne, or 55 cents per kilogram, if collection costs incurred by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department are included.

Michelle Au Wing-tze, the senior environmental affairs officer with Friends of the Earth (HK), said most places that charged for waste collection did not aim to recoup all costs. A fee need not create a heavy financial burden if the main goal was to get people to sort their rubbish, particularly kitchen waste, she said. Even so, the new system would probably encounter some difficulties, she said.

“It is too convenient for people to dump their rubbish now. It is all just steps away from homes. With a charge, that might have to be changed, too.”

In 2005, the Environmental Protection Department published a waste policy framework that aimed to introduce a rubbish fee by 2007. But that failed to happen as it said more studies were needed. Three years later, it launched an 18-month study on the ways of collecting the fee. But still, the department could not set out the way forward.

Instead, the government has pushed forward plans to incinerate waste and expand landfills. Last month, the government’s environmental advisory body approved of plans to build the world’s largest incinerator, at a cost of between HK$8 billion and HK$13 billion, on Shek Kwu Chau, an island south of Lantau.

chifai.cheung@scmp.com

Neath waste plant closed over emissions

Jan 9th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wales-12073314

24 December 2010 Last updated at 12:38 GMT

A waste incinerator has been voluntarily shut down after breaching its limit for emissions.

Environment Agency Wales said it was taking legal action against the council-owned plant at Crymlyn Burrows in Neath Port Talbot.

Officers said it had failed five out of 10 dioxin emissions tests since the summer although breaches were not at levels to cause health problems.

The plant’s operators said they were working to address the issue.

The plant, which opened in 2002, processes household waste for recycling and incineration from Neath Port Talbot and Bridgend.

It is operated by Neath Port Talbot (Recycling) Ltd – a wholly-owned subsidiary of the council.

The agency has issued an enforcement notice that will require the operators to take steps by a set date to improve emissions from the site.

The incinerator has been voluntarily shut down until mid January as investigations continue.

“Start Quote

We set the permit limits to protect people”

End Quote Steve Brown Environment Agency Wales

The agency said Public Health Wales had confirmed the breaches were not at a level to cause health problems to local people.

But the agency’s area manager Steve Brown said: “This situation has gone on too long.

“Out of the 10 dioxin results received since the summer, five of these have been over the permitted limit and this is unacceptable.

“Public Health Wales have reassured us that the levels of these breaches do not pose a risk for local people but are concerned if the situation was to continue.

“We set the permit limits to protect people and the environment and this is why we, as regulators of the site, have escalated our action.

“The company have done everything we have asked of them so far, but we will not stop our action until the site is back into compliance with its permit.”

Will Watson, a director of Neath Port Talbot (Recycling) Ltd, said: “We took a decision to temporarily close the plant for planned maintenance work two weeks early in light of the recent dioxin results.”

He said the plant was addressing the failed test results but they had to be put in context.

“The level of emissions which we have recorded are still well below the levels which are permitted for other industries by the Environment Agency for dioxin emissions,” he added.

Download PDF : crymlynburrows2008

Download : CTAPanelEnvJan2012

Incinerators’ good global track record

Jan 6th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

South China Morning Post

SCMP Letter   Jan 07 2012

Incinerators’ good global track record

Plasma arc is a suitable and proven method for the disposal of small quantities of hazardous waste. However, for household refuse it would use large quantities of energy, and it is definitely neither needed, nor feasible, for the disposal of 3,000 tonnes per day of municipal household waste.

The “old-fashioned” moving grate technology is fully capable of addressing Lai See’s “noxious chemical cocktail” (“Making a hash of dash to ash”, January 4) and hundreds of plants operate worldwide in highly sensitive areas.

To demand that the Environmental Protection Department considers this technology, which is unproven at any commercial scale, for Hong Kong is about as ludicrous as suggesting shooting all our garbage by space rocket into the sun. What is needed is a plant that meets the highest standards in operational efficiencies. That is where the department could learn from my firm.

Alexander Luedi, general manager, Explosion Power Hong Kong Limited

Meanwhile SCMP’s  Laisee  counters:

SCMP Laisee :  07 Jan 2012


Garbage in, garbage out

A letter in today’s paper pooh poohs plasma arc technology as a means of disposing of municipal solid waste saying: “To demand that the Environmental Protection Department should consider this technology, which is unproven at any commercial scale, for Hong Kong, is about as ludicrous as suggesting to shoot all of our garbage by space rocket into the sun!” Strong words from Alexander Luedi, who is the general manager of Explosion Power Hong Kong.

A little context of interest here, which Luedi doesn’t mention in his letter, is that his company, according to its website, specialises in cleaning furnaces, boilers, ash hoppers, silos and other vessels. “We provide online boiler cleaning equipment and services to thermal power plants, waste-to-energy plants, … to improve thermal efficiencies, reduce downtime, and improve the safety of maintenance workers.”

http://www.explosionpower.hk/ (link thanks to CTA)

So it’s not unreasonable to think Luedi’s eyes lit up at the prospect of business opportunities from a monster incinerator that processes some 3,000 tonnes of municipal solid waste a day which, in turn, generates 1,200 tonnes of fly ash.

In his letter, Luedi says plasma arc technology, “is neither needed, nor feasible for the disposal of 3,000 tonnes per day of municipal waste.”

His views don’t appear to be shared by authorities in Japan, the UK, Mexico, India and China, which are all using plasma arc technology to process municipal solid waste and to convert it into energy instead of the conventional moving grate technology proposed for Hong Kong. The new technology produces little in the way of emissions of toxic dioxins and less mess for the likes of Luedi and his company to clean up.

Smoke and obfuscation in defence of outdated incineration technology

Jan 6th, 2012
by Editor.
No comments yet

South China Morning Post

LAI SEE
Howard Winn
Jan 06, 2012

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

RTHK’s Backchat programme on Wednesday generated a certain amount of heat with its discussion on the proposed Shek Kwu Chau incinerator project. Elvis Au was wheeled out to bat for the government. He is the assistant director of the Environmental Protection Department.

During the discussion, Au defended the decision to use old moving-grate technology, which essentially moves the material over a grate and burns it, producing a noxious fume that is vented through a chimney that, at 130 metres high, will be about half the size of the IFC 1 building. Scrubbers on the incinerator will eliminate some of the particulate matter (PM10) that are 10 micrometres in size. But it will not stop the more dangerous carcinogenic-causing particulate matter (PM2.5) which, depending on the wind direction, will add to the poor air quality in Kowloon or the Pearl River Delta. Some 1,200 tonnes of fly ash a day, complete with dioxins, will also have to be transferred to barges and dumped.

When pressed on why the government was not considering plasma arc technology, which produces considerably fewer emissions and is environmentally much cleaner, Au became somewhat cagey. He said the government had spoken to representatives from plasma arc firms, but remained unconvinced, saying the technology was untested and could only handle relatively small quantities. This does not seem to square with evidence elsewhere, which suggests that, in theory, any volume of waste can be handled by increasing the number of burners.

Despite the decision against plasma arc technology, we gather that Aecom, the government’s consultants, will be visiting a plasma arc firm in Britain later this month to further inform themselves. But Aecom’s counterparts in North America seem more informed. Commenting on Milwaukee’s plans to proceed with a 1,200-tonne per day plant using plasma arc technology,Aecom’s Mike Zebell said: “We believe that this technology is not only environmentally friendly, but ready for large-scale commercialisation.”

The suspicion is that the government’s reluctance to consider plasma arc technology is because it is pandering to business interests, in that the proposed incinerator plan involves significant reclamation work and contractors are already salivating at the prospect of another lucrative concrete pouring exercise

Environmental official Elvis Au

1 of 2
Environmental official Elvis Au
← Earlier Posts Newer Posts →