The tourists going to the island of Mallorca in Spain are invited to bring their trash along with them to burn it in the new incinerator which is successfully fighting recycling, composting and reuse.

This is the –ironic- message that the local group GOB wanted to transmit in their latest action in front of the regional parliament upon the approval of the decree to import waste to feed the burner. Sadly, the European Commission is also supporting importing waste from many km away to the island despite being a contradiction of the proximity principle and the waste hierarchy.

In the beautiful island of Mallorca one can find the best and the worst of waste management in southern Europe. On one hand some zero waste municipalities (15% of Mallorca`s population) have implemented ambitious door-to-door source separation schemes which would allow them to recycle more than 75% of the waste. On the other hand the regional government through the company TIRME created to privatise waste management had built an incinerator with the capacity to burn 300,000tn of waste which represented 75% of all the municipal solid waste generated in the island.

After an obscure and dodgy process in 2007 this already oversized burner was enlarged with an extra capacity to burn 432,000tn more. In total, Mallorca generates 542,094 tn and has an incineration capacity of 736,000tn in 2011. The biggest incinerator in southern Europe burns 84% of all municipal waste generated in the island; hence most recyclables and compostables are today incinerated. Madness.

Today in Mallorca the more you recycle the more you pay, the more you burn the cheaper it is.

There are at least three reasons why this is a bad practice of waste and resource management:

–          It contradicts the waste hierarchy: Instead of recycling targets Mallorca has incineration targets of 62% of MSW. Before recycling or reuse the first option for waste in Mallorca is incineration. Every ton of waste that is recycled instead of burned increases the fee for the citizen because the contract with the incinerator obliges to feed it during the next 30 years, if a municipality prefers to recycle or reduce waste they will have to pay for the tones that the incinerator will not receive.

–          It goes against the European Resource Efficiency Roadmap: because of the contract with the incinerator the incentives are all for burning and not for recycling. According to the Resource Efficiency Strategy by 2020 incineration should be only for what is not recyclable and compostable. In Mallorca according to the contract most recyclables and compostables are and will be burned during next 30 years.

–          It goes against the people: the citizens are already paying the highest prices in waste management in Spain to burn waste in an inefficient incinerator that doesn’t even recover the heat. At the same time modern recycling and composting plants partly financed with EU money have to be paid when not being used because waste is being sent to the incinerator.

The case of Mallorca illustrates with all cruelty how incineration –or any kind of disposal- competes with recycling and the upper levels of the hierarchy. Hence, it is unlikely that the targets set by the EU will be accomplished unless the economic and legislative drivers are changed to prioritise recycling.

There are good examples of islands in the Mediterranean which have recycling rates above northern European standards (regions in Sardinia are above 60%). Mallorca itself has municipalities such as Esporles or Puigpunyent doing an excellent job (above 70% recycling) despite the adverse legislation and local conditions. With the right legislation and political will Zero Waste is possible in Mallorca, with current conditions sustainability is a mission impossible.

The Zero Waste movement asks the European Commission to intervene to cap the incineration overcapacity in cases like the one of Mallorca when recycling is directly hijacked. The current EU legislation gives all incentives to do the wrong thing and Mallorca is a clear example of it.

VietNamNet Bridge – Black smoke spirals up through the exhaust pipe on the roof of the funeral home. The fishy smell comes from the open outlets to the surrounding areas. Local residents in Binh Duong province complain they have to live together with the smoke from incinerators.

http://english.vietnamnet.vn/fms/environment/52506/living-together-with-the-smoke-from-incinerators.html

The incinerator next to residential quarter

The Binh Duong incinerator in Tan Dong Hiep ward of Di An town of Binh Duong province handled three incineration cases on the morning of November 5. When the mourners left, the incinerator began operating, discharging black smoke through the three exhaust pipes to the sky.

“We always get suffocated with the smoke. The situation is more terrible at night than in the day,” a local resident said to reporters. “We have to have the blanket cover over the surface to prevent the smell. If not, we cannot sleep,”he said.

Meanwhile, the reporters, though wearing two protective masks, still clearly smelled the fishy odor and the bone-ash.

A broken pipe was found behind the incinerator, from which the water from the incinerator comes out directly to the environment. Reporters’ heads got dizzy just after several minutes of standing there and breathing the fish smell.

Local residents said that the waste water has been flowing from the incinerator for the last many years, which has been soaking into the earth and the water wells, thus making the water dirty unusable.

Since the local residents reported the case to the incinerator’s management board, an edge has been built to prevent the waste water from flowing to the road. As a result, the waste water has been threading its way among the tombs and then soaking into the earth.

People not only have to live with the terrible waste water, but also have to sniff the smoke from the cremation.

Waste water and smoke attack people

Nguyen Tan Hoang, whose house faces the incinerator, said that he has been living in the fishy odor and the burnt smell for the last few years already. He has to close the doors tightly after 10 pm every day to prevent the smell, wearing a protective mask when sleeping.

Especially, Hoang complained relatives and friends do not want to visit him at home because they do not want to stay in the terrible atmosphere.

Tran Van Dinh, who lives next to Hoang, said that the board of management of the incinerator always promises that they would apply necessary measures to settle the problems, but nothing has been changed.

There are some 40 households living in the Tan An residential quarter of Tan Dong Hiep ward. The local residents here joked that they can be full up with the smoke every day, no need to eat.

Nguyen Van Trieu, an old man, said that every family has 2-3 children, and most of the children suffer bronchitis regularly. He said that local residents have complained about the environment pollution since the day the incinerator began operation.

However, the incinerator’s board of management still keeps a deaf ear to the complaints, while the situation is getting worse.

Tran Quoc Tuan, Chair of the Tan Dong Hiep ward People’s Committee, said that when inspectors come, the pipes would stop generating smoke. Therefore, the provincial environment department concludes that is cannot find any problems here. Meanwhile, local people still have to live in the serious pollution.

However, Tuan said, people have vowed that they would keep struggling to protect their lives. The problem would be discussed at the upcoming meeting between the local National Assembly’s deputies and voters.

Thanh Mai

Submitted by admin on Nov 16th 2012, 12:00am

News›Hong Kong

ENVIRONMENT

Austin Chiu austin.chiu@scmp.com

It was a breach of natural justice for head of environment department to approve review that gave green light to incinerator, court told

It was unreasonable for the Environmental Protection Department director to approve an impact-assessment report made by his own department on the proposed building of a massive offshore waste incinerator, a court heard yesterday.

Barrister Hector Pun Hei made the criticism on behalf of a Cheung Chau resident, who brought a judicial review against the HK$23 billion project on Shek Kwu Chau, an island south of Lantau.

In the Court of First Instance, Pun, one of the lawyers representing 66-year-old Leung Hon-wai, said it involved a conflict of interest when the director granted the permit that allowed the proposal to go ahead.

“It is a breach of natural justice to make a person a judge in his own cause,” Pun said.

Leung is challenging decisions by the Town Planning Board and the director of the Environmental Protection Department, which cleared the way for the incinerator’s construction. He is one of four people who lodged a judicial challenge. His was selected to proceed and the other applicants will be bound by the decision.

Johnny Mok SC, for the government, rejected a criticism by Leung’s lawyers that the environmental-impact assessment report did not meet the requirements specified in a technical memorandum and a study brief from the administration.

On Wednesday, Leung’s lawyer contended that the report was substandard, because the department deferred looking at how it would remedy the permanent loss of a 31-hectare marine habitat of high ecological value. That problem was to be considered in a supplementary study.

Yesterday, Mok said that while the department was not allowed to make another environmental-impact report, a supplementary study that sought to help with the “technical implementation” of the measures must be permitted.

Mok said the environmental-impact assessment already included, as required, a study on the feasibility and effectiveness of establishing a 700-hectare marine park to make up for the loss of the existing habitat, which was home to finless porpoises.

The supplementary study would deal with the marine park’s ecological profile, extent and location.

“It would be strange if there was no further study,” Mok said. “The fact that a small corner of a vast stretch of water where finless porpoises swim is cut out doesn’t mean a massive loss. You have to consider the bigger picture.”

He also said it was wrong for the other side to suggest that the department did not conduct any studies on the establishment of the marine park, citing reports from various departments from 2002 and last year.

“This is a careful regime designed to protect the valuable species,” Mok said, referring to the creation of the marine park.

The hearing continues today before Mr Justice Au Hing-cheung.

Topics:

Incinerator

Shek Kwu Chau

Lantau

Environmental Protection Department