May, 2013:

http://www.gainscotland.org.uk/health.shtml

For every report that says incinerators are safe, there seems to be a dozen more that question this (scroll to the foot of this page). One of the most well known and respected is ‘The Health Effects of Waste Incinerators‘, published by the British Society for Ecological Medicine.  This examines hundreds of scientific studies from around the world.  Collectively, these studies paint a disturbing picture of a multitude of health problems that cannot be simply dismissed.

Reports by respected government bodies have been called into question. For example, in 2004, Defra published a report titled Review of the Environmental and Health Effects of Waste Management. This report largely discounts health concerns related to incineration. However, the Royal Society pointed out that Defra’s report fails to discuss cumulative effects, timelines for exposure, effects of mixtures and synergies of emissions and the additive effects, for example, when combined with other environmental and occupational exposures. Defra acknowledged these deficiencies in the final draft. However, the Royal Society subsequently stated:

“Although the uncertainties have been acknowledged in this report, it is important that anyone using these data takes adequate consideration of its inherent uncertainty”. [ Source: The Royal Society’s peer review of Defra’s report on the environmental and health effects of waste management, March 2004]

Both the Defra report and the Royal Society’s peer review are available online.

Toxic emissions

Burning waste emits fine particulates, heavy metals, innumerable chemicals, a variety of poisonous gases and large quantities of toxic ash [1]. For further information see Toxic Emissions.

Poor monitoring of emissions

The quality of monitoring of emissions from incinerators is poor – click here for more details.

Disease

Emissions from incinerators are implicated in a wide variety of conditions including respiratory disorders, neurological diseases, mental illness and various types of cancer [2]. A report published in September 2011 shows that although the emissions from waste incinerators may not be great, overall they can have a significant health impact (Health burden of waste incinerators in Seoul, Scientific study published Sept 2011). Also see this letter (click here) from Giovanni Ghirga, (International Society of Doctors for Environment) from 29 March 2011, which suggests that the health burden from waste incinerators could be very high indeed.

Birth defects

Many studies indicate an increase in birth defects downwind of incinerators. A study in France has shown that chromosomal defects and other major anomalies including facial clefts, megacolon and renal dysplasias may be caused by living close to incinerators [2].

At the end of his report into the health effects of pollution on children, Ralph Ryder concludes:

“The ever-increasing number of damaged babies being born around incinerators should be taken as a strong warning that the ‘experts’ and their friendly politicians are deliberately playing down overwhelming evidence of serious harm to suit industry’s financial interests, and, as it has been shown many times before, in many cases, their own.”

Click here to download his report, “What do you want – a Boy or a Girl”.

Infant mortality

Independent researcher Michael Ryan has found that figures from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) show that infant mortality rates (i.e. deaths below one year) in areas upwind of incinerators are significantly lower than in downwind areas. For example areas upwind of the Cheylesmore incinerator in Coventry (see areas shown in green on the map below) recorded an average infant mortality rate of 3.2 per 1,000 live births between 2003 and 2005, while in downwind areas (shown in red) the average was 8.2 (download ONS statistics). Downwind of the Deptford incinerator infant mortality is 8 times higher than the national average [see article here].

Some reports claim that such statistics can be attributed to socio-economic factors, i.e. poverty. However Mr Ryan has found that even in wealthy areas having an incinerator nearby can affect infant mortality – see report on Chingford Green ward in London.

Reduced life span in adults

ONS figures show that New Cross ward, which is largely downwind of the Debtford incinerator, has the highest Standardised Mortality Ratio out of all 625 council wards in London with a figure of 161 for 1999-2003. This translates as 61% more deaths than would be expected [3 & 4]. (See ONS statistics)

Contamination of land, water and vegetation

Studies show that soil and vegetation close to incinerators may become contaminated with incinerator releases of dioxins and heavy metals to levels above normal background concentrations. As a consequence, there is a possibility of agricultural produce becoming contaminated. Livestock may also take in pollutants, largely through ingestion of contaminated vegetation and soil [1]. Furthermore the toxic ash from incinerators will likely be put in landfill, where it can pollute watercourses [2].

[1] Allsop et al, Incineration and Human Health, 2001, Greenpeace Research Laboratories, Univ. of Exeter. Download report.

[2] Thomson, J. Anthony, H.: The Health Effects of Waste Incinerators, 2005, The British Society for Ecological Medicine. Download report.

[3] Crown Copyright, NATIONAL STATISTICS, SOURCE: ONS

[4] Original statistical analysis by Michael Ryan and Dr Dick Van Steenis. See UKHR and CountryDoctor for further information.

Reports – For further reports, Click here

Incineration and health issues – Friends of the Earth 2002

Friends of the Earth primarily campaigns against incineration because burning materials is a waste of valuable resources. However we also recognise that there are valid concerns about the impacts on health. We are especially concerned when incinerators are proposed in areas where levels of pollution are already high.

Incineration and Human Health – Greenpeace 2002

A broad range of health effects have been associated with living near to incinerators as well as with working at these installations. Such effects include cancer (among both children and adults) adverse impacts on the respiratory system, heart disease, immune system effects, increased allergies and congenital abnormalities. Some studies, particularly those on cancer, relate to old rather than modern incinerators. However, modern incinerators operating in the last few years have also been associated with adverse health effects.

The Health Effects of Waste Incinerators 2005, updated 2008

Both the amount of waste and its potential toxicity are increasing. Available landfill sites are being used up, and incineration is being seen increasingly as a solution to the waste problem. This report examines the literature concerning the health effects of incinerators.

http://ukhr.eu/incineration/westmidlandmap.pdf

http://www.goldmanprize.org/recipient/rossano-ercolini

Prize Recipient

Rossano Ercolini

2013 Europe

Italy

Sustainable Development

In Italy and throughout Europe, incineration has been the leading approach to waste management. Consumerism and production has accelerated this trend, rapidly filling landfills and creating a bigger demand for incinerators.

In 1994, construction plans for an incinerator were proposed in a small town in Tuscany. Yet residents were not informed about the impact of the incinerator. Every year, incinerators remove thousands of tons of material from the recycling stream and burn them, releasing greenhouse gases into the atmosphere and leaving behind toxics that endanger the health of nearby residents.

Motivation
A teacher at an elementary school not two miles from the proposed incinerator, Rossano Ercolini had heard of cities like San Francisco that were successfully working to eliminate waste. He taught his students to recycle paper and replaced plastic water bottles and plastic utensils in the school lunchroom with pitchers, glasses and silverware.

When Ercolini heard about construction plans for the incinerator, he became concerned about the local residents’ health. He saw his responsibility as an educator to protect students’ well-being and inform the broader community about the incinerator’s risks as well as solutions to sustainably manage the town’s garbage.

Impact
Ercolini began organizing town hall meetings in his village, Capannori—the capital of Italy’s paper mill industry—where residents were able to ask questions and get clear answers about the whys and hows of recycling. He brought a bag of mixed waste and demonstrated how to sort out metal, glass and plastic to recycle and food scraps for composting and livestock feed. He brought in scientists, clergy, and other experts to share information about the dangers of incineration as well as the economic and environmental benefits of Zero Waste.

People began to see that it was indeed possible to manage waste without having to rely on incineration. Building on this momentum, Ercolini formed Ambiente e Futuro (Environment and Future) and began mobilizing street protests where citizens demanded authorities to stop plans for the incinerator. In response to the community’s concerns, Lucca’s regional government officials canceled the incinerator’s construction and put Ercolini in charge of developing a waste management plan. He went door to door to get the community’s input on alternatives to the incinerator, empowering them to propose solutions that would work for them. A year later, Capannori began implementing a new collection system that now recycles 82 percent of the city’s waste. The larger province of Lucca is now incinerator-free following the closure of two existing plants, and the government is committed to keeping incinerators out of the province.

Ercolini is also looking at the bigger picture, working with companies to use packaging that produces less waste. For example, he’s collaborating with Italy’s largest manufacturer of coffee products, Lavazza, to develop reusable versions of single-use espresso capsules. He is also promoting Zero Waste as an opportunity to create jobs, where young people are trained to refurbish durable goods or break them down to recover metals and other material.

Capannori became a springboard for the nation’s Zero Waste movement, which soon grew to include Naples—a strategic location given its dysfunctional waste collection system that left garbage piling up and burning on the streets. Ercolini successfully proposed the city to host Zero Waste International Alliance’s 2009 global meeting. A few months later, the city of Naples joined Capannori in adopting Zero Waste.

Thanks to the grassroots campaign led by Ercolini educating communities on the merits of Zero Waste, 40 incinerators have been scrapped or shut down and 117 municipalities (home to more than 3 million residents) have joined Capannori in adopting a goal of  Zero Waste. In November 2012, for the first time in Europe, the small but affluent region of Aosta passed a referendum banning incineration with overwhelming support from 90 percent of voters.  Ercolini’s efforts have sparked the beginning of a Zero Waste network throughout Europe, with countries such as England, Estonia, Spain, and Denmark following Italy’s lead.