Clear The Air News Blog Rotating Header Image

September 1st, 2013:

Is incineration holding back recycling?

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/aug/29/incineration-recycling-europe-debate-trash

Is incineration holding back recycling?

Increasingly common in Europe, municipal ‘waste-to-energy’ incinerators are being touted as a green trash-disposal alternative

Newhaven incinerator in East Sussex , waste incinerator

After 10 years of debate, Newhaven incinerator opened last year. Photograph: Peter Cripps/Alamy

For communities short on landfill space, “waste-to-energy” incineration sounds like a bulletproof solution: Recycle all you can, and turn the rest into heat or electricity. That’s how it’s been regarded in much of Europe, where nearly a quarter of all municipal solid waste is burned in 450 incinerators, and increasingly in the United States, where dozens of cities and towns are considering new, cutting-edge plants.

But leaders of the international zero-waste movement, which seeks to reuse all products and send nothing to landfills or incinerators, say incineration falls short on the energy front and actually encourages waste. Many “zero wasters” — including groups such as Zero Waste Europe and the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, or GAIA — have become ardent opponents of the technology, contending that proponents have co-opted the carefully crafted zero-waste label by suggesting that burning to produce energy isn’t actually wasting. In Europe, where incineration capacity continues to grow despite already exceeding the trash supply in some countries, the showdown goes beyond semantics to the heart of the meaning of sustainability.

While the world certainly has no shortage of it, trash is not renewable — not in the way that sunlight, wind, and geothermal heat are. Producing goods from virgin, finite resources requires energy — lots of it. Once the goods become trash, zero-waste advocates say, burning them in an incinerator destroys those resources for good.

Incinerators can provide heat for municipal heating systems or steam for electricity, recovering some of the energy used to produce their fuel. But even given the environmental costs of recycling, which include transporting and processing the material, zero wasters contend that it makes far more sense to recycle than to incinerate.

The precise energy savings for any given waste stream depends on its composition, according to Jeffrey Morris, an economist and environmental consultant with Sound Resource Management Group Inc. in Olympia, Washington. “But it would be a surprising situation to find a waste stream that it would be more beneficial to burn rather than to source-separate and recycle,” says Morris, who did a study in 1995 — still widely cited by recycling advocates — which found that recycling most materials from municipal solid waste saves on average three to five times more energy than does burning them for electricity.

These days, the waste-to-energy debate is particularly active in Europe, where government incentives and subsidies have encouraged the construction of incinerators. Waste-to-energy supporters contend that the recycle-versus-incinerate comparison represents a false choice — that the two can coexist. “We see waste-to-energy continuing to have a role to play in an integrated approach to waste management, providing hygienic treatment of the remaining waste that is not suitable for sustainable recycling, and at the same time generating energy from it, rather than it being sent to a landfill,” Ella Stengler, managing director of the Confederation of European Waste-to-Energy Plants, wrote in an email. “Recycling and waste-to-energy are complementary to achieve lower landfill rates.”

As it turns out, countries with the highest rates of garbage incineration — Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, for example, all incinerate at least 50 percent of their waste — also tend to have high rates of recycling and composting of organic materials and food waste. But zero-wasters argue that were it not for large-scale incineration, these environmentally conscious countries would have even higher rates of recycling. Germany, for example, incinerates 37 percent of its waste and recycles 45 percent — a considerably better recycling rate than the 30-plus percent of Scandinavian countries.

There’s no doubt that dumping untreated municipal solid waste in the landfills common in eastern and southern Europe, where incineration rates lag far behind those of northern Europe, poses significant environmental problems. These include the leaching of toxic chemicals into groundwater, an increasingly urgent shortage of space, and the release of methane — a potent greenhouse gas — into the atmosphere. (In the United States, more than half of all waste is dumped in landfills, and about 12 percent burned, of which only a portion is used to produce energy.) According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, landfills are the third-largest source of methane in the United States, behind industry and agriculture. Such environmental impacts are the reason why many European countries have instituted landfill bans in recent decades, contributing to the rapid expansion of incineration and waste-to-energy technology.

Zero-wasters say that a major problem with incineration is the long-term contracts that waste-to-energy plants sign with the cities that supply them with trash. Incinerators are extremely expensive to build — large, modern facilities in Europe cost $150 million to $230 million — and to make a profit and repay investors, incinerator operators need a guaranteed stream of waste. The operators sign contracts with municipalities to provide a certain volume of waste over a long period of time, often 20 or 30 years, effectively committing municipalities to generating a certain amount of waste. Zero-waste advocates say this reduces the incentive to recycle more and waste less, which exists with landfills, where tipping fees can be high.

With incineration, said Dominic Hogg, chairman of UK-based waste-management consulting firm Eunomia, “the financial logic for engaging in further recycling is lost.”

Hege Rooth Olbergsveen, a senior adviser in Norway’s Waste Recovery and Hazardous Waste department and a proponent of waste-to-energy, acknowledges that the economics of incineration can impair recycling efforts.

“It is in many cases more expensive to collect and sort out waste for material recycling than just to collect it as residual waste and send it to energy recovery,” she wrote in an email. “Some municipalities introduce only cost-effective waste solutions, while other municipalities have strong political will to introduce environmental measures and collect more waste for recycling.”

German zero-waste advocate Hartmut Hoffmann, head of Friends of the Earth Germany’s waste working group, said he’s seen such an effect in Bavaria. In and around the towns of Schwandorf, Coburg, and Burgkirchen, each of which contains an incinerator, some waste authorities have openly refused to separate organic waste for composting, he said, instead incinerating the material at a lower cost. “For us, this refusal is good proof that the existence of incineration plants can hinder recycling,” Hoffmann said.

In Flanders, Belgium, an effort to keep a lid on incinerator contracts has led nearer to zero waste, said Joan Marc Simon, executive director of Zero Waste Europe and European regional coordinator for GAIA. Since the early 1990s, when recycling rates were relatively low, the local waste authority in Flanders has decided not to increase incineration beyond roughly 25 percent, Simon said. As a result, combined recycling and composting rates now exceed 75 percent, GAIA says. “They stabilized and even reduced waste generation when they capped incineration,” Simon said.

Without incineration, he believes, most European countries could improve current recycling rates of 20 or 30 percent to 80 percent within six months. Hogg agreed, saying that rates of 70 percent should be “easy” to attain. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which calculates recycling and composting together, puts the current U.S. rate at 35 percent, compared to a combined European Union figure of 40 percent. Many of the newer members of the EU, mainly from Eastern Europe, have few if any waste-to-energy incinerators, recycle very little, and landfill 75 percent or more of their trash.

Except for pockets like Flanders, Simon believes that the major mistake Europe’s leading incinerator countries have made is committing too much trash to incineration too soon by instituting landfill bans. “Back then nobody knew or expected it would be possible to achieve the current recycling rates,” he said. “As they rolled out recycling they also planned incineration capacity. This trend hit the wall when recycling started competing with incineration for the available waste. In this situation some countries decided to give way to incineration and either import waste to burn or burn recyclables.”

Plastics are particularly attractive for burning, as they’re made with petroleum and generate more energy when incinerated than almost any other material. “Plastic is a good fuel, ” said Pål Mårtensson, a zero-waste advocate in Gothenburg, Sweden. “So they don’t bother that much to sort it out [for recycling].”

Burning plastic is also known to release harmful dioxins into the air. Waste-to-energy proponents say state-of-the-art plants filter out such toxic air pollution, but opponents say even the best plants do not filter out all toxics. This week, the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency revoked the operating license of a waste-to-energy incinerator in Dumfries after a large fire, saying the operator had failed to recover energy efficiently and had not met the requirements of its operating permit.

Despite EU directives calling for member states to both end the burning of all recyclable materials and achieve recycling rates of 50 percent (the current average is 25 percent) by 2020, public subsidies support the expansion of incineration capacity in many European countries.

Waste importers Sweden (with 31 plants as of 2011), Germany (72 plants), the Netherlands (12), and Denmark (29) continue to approve, finance, and build new waste-to-energy plants even though capacity exceeds domestic waste volumes. The United Kingdom (24 plants) is expected to reach capacity by 2018, according to a June report by Eunomia. Still, incineration remains profitable for facilities accepting waste that is shipped hundreds of miles from eastern and southern Europe.

Malcolm Williams, a director of the UK Zero Waste Alliance, is concerned that increased incineration capacity may lead Europe to miss what he deems are already modest waste-reduction targets for 2020. Even 90 percent recycling should be attainable, he contends. “It’s just a myth that recycling is a difficult thing to do,” said Williams. “So why on earth is anybody planning anything that is going to burn or bury more than 10 percent of the waste we’re producing?”

No technical feasibility and reliability issues in Green Island Cement’s waste plan

Comment:

Green Island would only want dry MSW with calorific value above 7 MJ/kg since it is cheaper than coal to fire the kiln

Our current system mixes our food waste with our MSW since we have no at-source separation laws; our former ENB boss was too busy travelling overseas visiting incinerators & a Scottish whiskey distillery to enact the legislation

Our wet market food waste is 90% water <3 MJ/kg versus 30% water value in Europe, 50% Japan & 55% Korea

You cannot burn water for calorific value so they would have to add coal to co-combust

Solution: Our world class existing sewerage treatment system could easily absorb all our daily food waste if pulverized after collection as Green bin waste

Indeed at 2016 capacity 2.4+ million m3 per day Stonecutters could handle our daily 3,300 m3 food waste in just two minutes

To have a functioning incinerator the Govt needs a guaranteed supply of dry MSW per day every day since dioxin emissions are highest on startup and shutdown of the burners

This daily MSW feedstock requirement defeats recycling aims + explains why Govt is not willing to share its commodity, waste, with Green Island where cement kilns operate more efficiently at 1450 deg C versus only 750-850 Deg C for a Neolithic (modern) incinerator

Of course we need man made islands as our new landfill ash lagoons since 1/3 by weight of what is thermally converted remains as ash

But landfills do not leak – ask Govt – you can trust them not to lie, right ?

South China Morning Post

Published on South China Morning Post (http://www.scmp.com)

Home > No technical feasibility and reliability issues in Green Island Cement’s waste plan



No technical feasibility and reliability issues in Green Island Cement’s waste plan

Friday, 30 August, 2013, 12:00am

CommentLetters

I refer to the letter by Elvis W. K. Au, assistant director of environmental protection (“Cement plan not yet viable refuse solution [1]“, August 16).

Mr Au says the government has refused to consider Green Island Cement’s Eco-Co-Combustion proposal for the treatment of municipal solid waste because the company must first deal with “technical feasibility and reliability, environmental acceptability and planning issues”. I wish to clarify some of the points he raised.

Regarding technical feasibility and reliability, our Eco-Co-Combustion waste treatment process uses proven conventional technology, which can be either kiln-based or moving-grate-based. It just means integrating conventional technology with a cement plant. There are no technical feasibility and reliability problems.

On environmental acceptability, over the last decade we have completed more than 100 separate technical studies, and have set up a pilot plant to demonstrate the feasibility, environmental impact, and public acceptability of the proposal. One of the main objectives of our study was to verify the air emission results which, when scaled up, yielded no discernible impact on nearby villages. Also, our Eco-Co-Combustion proposal uses heat energy very efficiently and it has a very low residue to be sent to landfills.

With regard to the environmental impact assessment study, when it became clear in 2008 that, no matter what we did, the government would not consider our proposal, we ceased expenditure on the project. If we were given the chance to participate, we would carry out such an assessment promptly. As there is virtually no adverse environmental impact, we are confident that our assessment would be successful.

On planning issues, according to studies conducted by law firm Mayer Brown JSM and international planning, design and environmental firm EDAW, since Tap Shek Kok is an existing industrial site and the cement plant is already in operation, our Eco-Co-Combustion System does not face any land-zoning/planning issues as it is a cement-related activity. In fact, we received a letter from the Lands Department stating that the operation of the Eco-Co-Combustion System would not change the land use.

We believe that the Eco-Co-Combustion System is a good option for solving Hong Kong’s imminent waste problem. We hope the Environmental Protection Department will reconsider the benefits of our proposal and let us participate in the municipal-solid-waste-management tender process.

Don Johnston, executive director, Green Island Cement (Holdings) Limited



Links:
[1] http://www.scmp.com/comment/letters/article/1297010/letters-editor-august-16-2013

No cover-up over leak at Tuen Mun landfill, says Christine Loh

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11830202

The Lancet. 2002 Jan 26
Chromosomal congenital anomalies & residence near hazardous waste landfill sites.
Previous findings of the EUROHAZCON study showed a 33% increase in risk of non-chromosomal anomalies (CA) near hazardous waste landfill sites. We studied 245 cases of (CA)+ 2412 controls who lived near 23 such sites in Europe. We noted a higher risk of (CA) in people who lived close to sites (0-3 km) than in those who lived further away (3-7 km

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20706694

2010 Jul 11
Assessment of DNA damage by RAPD in Paracentrotus lividus embryos exposed to amniotic fluid from residents living close to waste landfill sites.
Study aim: assess genotoxic effects of environmental chemicals on residents living near landfills. the first time assessment of DNA damage in P. lividus embryos tested using RAPD strategy after exposure to amniotic fluid from residents near waste landfill sites.

www.ipsnews.net/2011/02/environment-dioxin-levels-soar-on-icelandic-farms/#

Dioxin Levels Soar on Icelandic Farms
26/2/2011 NW Icelandic town of Isafjordur– milk causing pandemonium. Dioxin & dioxin-like compounds, found to be present in amounts higher than the recommended maximum levels, threatening the future of local farmers & angering residents.
Tested milk came from a farm located in a valley only 1.5 kms from a waste-burning incinerator that was closed by the authorities last year due to consistently high levels of pollutants

“The emission levels are measured per cubic metre in the exhaust from the incinerator rather than total emissions. As a result, an incinerator that burns more waste but has a lower emission measurement can emit more dioxin,” explains Sigridur Kristjansdottir from the EAI. In 2007, the Environment Agency of Iceland (EAI) measured emissions from waste incinerators. According to regulations of the European Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, maximum emission levels of dioxin should not exceed 0.1 ng/m3.

“The emission levels are measured per cubic metre in the exhaust from the incinerator rather than total emissions. As a result, an incinerator that burns more waste but has a lower emission measurement can emit more dioxin,” explains Sigridur Kristjansdottir from the EAI.

However, in 2007, emission levels in Isafjordur were 21 times the maximum EC regulation level.

In addition, concern has arisen in the small town of Kirkjubaejarklaustur, in South Iceland, where dioxin levels were recorded at 95 times the maximum exposure level in 2007. And in Vestmannaeyjar, an island just off South Iceland, the dioxin level was 84 times the maximum exposure standard.

In all three cases, the results were sent to the Ministry for the Environment but were not released publicly.

In Kirkjubaejarklaustur, the waste incinerator is located in the same complex as the local school, sports centre, swimming pool, and music school. The original plan had been to use the waste heat from the incinerator to heat the surrounding buildings.

South China Morning Post

Published on South China Morning Post (http://www.scmp.com)

Home > No cover-up over leak at Tuen Mun landfill, says Christine Loh



No cover-up over leak at Tuen Mun landfill, says Christine Loh

Friday, 30 August, 2013, 9:54pm

NewsHong Kong

Stuart Lau stuart.lau@scmp.com

An environment official assured the public yesterday that there had been no cover-up about a waste leak from a landfill and vowed to be open in handling questions about it.

Christine Loh Kung-wai, Acting Secretary for the Environment, said there had been only one instance so far of effluent leaking from the Ta Kwu Ling rubbish dump, as the Environmental Protection Department officers had reported on Wednesday.

And despite residents’ fears, it was “not true” that there had been a similar leak at the Tuen Mun landfill.

Loh said officers who went to the Tuen Mun facility after receiving complaints found that the pollution was a mix of surface runoff and soil, not leachate, the toxic moisture that oozes from stacked rubbish.

It was the first time a political appointee from the Environment Bureau had responded to accusations that there had been a cover-up because the government had taken a month to disclose the Ta Kwu Ling leak.

Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing is expected to resume work today after a holiday.

Loh said no health or ecological damage had resulted from the Ta Kwu Ling incident and promised the bureau would continue to take questions and inquiries about the site.

“We want to be, and I think we are being, open and transparent. Of course we welcome your continuing questions,” she said.

The bureau would arrange a site visit for the Legislative Council environmental affairs panel tomorrow.



Links:
[1] http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1300430/environmental-authorities-draw-fire-over-ta-kwu-ling-landfill-leak
[2] http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1300175/ta-kwu-ling-landfill-waste-leaks-nearby-rivers

Restaurateur buys Hong Kong newspaper as side dish

f94ca9b36fb5033acd0a323bc5827686.jpg

Kenny Wee, at Metro Daily’s office in Kwun Tong, finds plenty of opportunities for the title spread before him. Photo: Edward Wong

South China Morning Post

Published on South China Morning Post (http://www.scmp.com)

Home > Restaurateur buys Hong Kong newspaper as side dish



Restaurateur buys Hong Kong newspaper as side dish

Saturday, 31 August, 2013, 12:00am

BusinessCompanies

MEDIA

Sophie Yu sophie.yu@scmp.com

What is a cash cow business? Casinos? E-commerce?

The answer given by restaurant boss Kenny Wee Ho may surprise many – newspapers.

The paper has been there for more than a decade and I see no possibility for its performance to deteriorate dramatically

Wee has paid HK$200 million to acquire Metro Daily, Hong Kong’s first free newspaper – “in cash”, he said – with the deal to be finalised within days.

Metro Daily is a cash cow,” Wee said. “It is a profit-generating business.”

He expects to make his investment back in three years.

Wee, born in Hong Kong and educated in Australia, now runs three restaurants in Hong Kong, three in Taiwan and two others in Australia.

He said he wanted to diversify his business portfolio because “to be honest, restaurants won’t make huge money”.

But he also said he would not take risks in pursuit of big money. “I’m not a risk-taker,” he said.

Wee said he had been looking at different businesses in recent years, and Metro Daily had emerged as the best choice.

At one stage he was on the verge of investing in investment banks but decided against it because the investment required was too big and he knew little about the industry.

“I don’t have the guts to risks like that,” he said.

He had also followed the property market closely but had failed to spot any investment opportunities due to soaring prices.

“By comparison, Metro is a safe investment,” Wee said.

“The paper has been there for more than a decade and I see no possibility for its performance to deteriorate dramatically.”

Metro Daily was launched in 2002 and 400,000 copies are distributed in MTR stations every weekday morning. Publishing group Sing Tao News, which publishes its own free Chinese-language newspaper, Headline Daily, once showed interest in acquiring Metro Daily as part of a syndicate.

Headline Daily is currently the market leader. Launched in 2005, its daily circulation topped 880,000 copies last year, according to the latest financial report available.

Wee said he would not touch Metro Daily‘s operations.

“It’s a profitable company and it has its working routine,” he said. “I don’t want to change it.”

But as a boss who can go to the office every day, in contrast to the newspaper’s former Swedish owners, who are far away, Wee said he would be better able to explore the potential of Metro Daily and improve the paper’s “vitality”.

Part of the plan is to expand the distribution of Metro Daily beyond MTR stations to residential buildings and convenience stores.

Wee said Metro Daily lacked the resources to compete with Headline Daily or Next Media’s Sharp Daily in terms of wide news coverage but had its own advantage through its distribution monopoly in MTR stations. “Looking forward, what we will do is to continue to expand the unique distribution networks,” Wee said.

He said that while 400,000 copies were enough for the MTR, he would negotiate with developers to distribute the free paper in some residential areas and shopping malls. “These distribution channels have to be exclusive to us,” he said.

If such deals were achieved, circulation could easily be increased to 600,000, he said.

Vitality also means more investment in multimedia to add value to the masthead. Wee took his iPhone from his pocket, and said: “Our future is in smartphones.”

He said the paper would co-operate with the advertisers and do a lot of online retailing, adding that Metro Shop, an online shopping platform, would open next month.

“We’ve already got more than 70 advertisers to join,” Wee said.

He said consumers would enjoy discounts and convenient pick-up arrangements, and could place orders and make payments on their mobile phones.

The Hong Kong business contributed net revenue of €717,000 (HK$7.3 million) to Metro International last year, down 49 per cent year on year according to the group’s 2012 annual accounts, with the Swedish publisher saying “the newspaper in Hong Kong is facing increased competition from new market entrants”.



Chromosomal congenital anomalies and residence near hazardous waste landfill sites.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11830202

Lancet. 2002 Jan 26;359(9303):320-2.

Chromosomal congenital anomalies and residence near hazardous waste landfill sites.

Vrijheid M, Dolk H, Armstrong B, Abramsky L, Bianchi F, Fazarinc I, Garne E, Ide R, Nelen V, Robert E, Scott JE, Stone D, Tenconi R.

Source

EUROCAT Central Registry, Environmental Epidemiology Unit, Department of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK. m.vrijheid@lshtm.ac.uk

Abstract

Previous findings of the EUROHAZCON study showed a 33% increase in risk of non-chromosomal anomalies near hazardous waste landfill sites. Here, we studied 245 cases of chromosomal anomalies and 2412 controls who lived near 23 such sites in Europe. After adjustment for confounding by maternal age and socioeconomic status, we noted a higher risk of chromosomal anomalies in people who lived close to sites (0-3 km) than in those who lived further away (3-7 km; odds ratio 1.41, 95% CI 1.00-1.99). Our results suggest an increase in risk of chromosomal anomalies similar to that found for non-chromosomal anomalies.

PMID:

11830202

[PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

Assessment of DNA damage by RAPD in Paracentrotus lividus embryos exposed to amniotic fluid from residents living close to waste landfill sites.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20706694

J Biomed Biotechnol. 2010;2010. pii: 251767. doi: 10.1155/2010/251767. Epub 2010 Jul 11.

Assessment of DNA damage by RAPD in Paracentrotus lividus embryos exposed to amniotic fluid from residents living close to waste landfill sites.

Guida M, Guida M, De Felice B, Santafede D, D’Alessandro R, Di Spiezio Sardo A, Scognamiglio M, Ferrara C, Bifulco G, Nappi C.

Source

Department of Obstetric Gynecology Urological Sciences and Reproductive Medicine, University of Naples Federico II, Via Pansini, Napoli, Italy.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess the genotoxic effects of environmental chemicals on residents living near landfills. The study was based on samples of amniotic fluid from women living in the intensely polluted areas around the Campania region of Italy compared to a nonexposed control group. We evaluated the genetic effects that this amniotic fluids collected in contaminated sites had on Paracentrotus lividus embryos. DNA damage was detected through changes in RAPD (Random Amplified Polymorphism DNA) profiles. The absence of the amplified DNA fragments indicated deletions in Paracentrotus lividus DNA exposed to the contaminated amniotic fluids when compared to equal exposure to uncontaminated fluids. These results show the ability of RAPD-PCR to detect and isolate DNA sequences representing genetic alterations induced in P. lividus embryos. Using this method, we identified two candidate target regions for DNA alterations in the genome of P. lividus. Our research indicates that RAPD-PCR in P. lividus embryo DNA can provide a molecular approach for studying DNA damage from pollutants that can impact human health. To our knowledge, this is the first time that assessment of DNA damage in P. lividus embryos has been tested using the RAPD strategy after exposure to amniotic fluid from residents near waste landfill sites.

PMID:

20706694

[PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

PMCID:

PMC2913803

Free PMC Article

Images from this publication.See all images (3)

Free text

Figure 1

Figure 1

Comparison of developmental defects and mortality in P. lividus embryos following exposure over the range of zygote to pluteus stage. The gray bar represents the untreated negative control (C0). Unpolluted and polluted amniotic liquid-induced developmental defects are represented, respectively, by white and black bars. P1, per cent larval malformations; P2, per cent developmental arrest at blastula/gastrula stage; D, per cent embryonic mortality, N, normal larvae. Results are expressed as means ± SE from six separate experiments.

Assessment of DNA Damage by RAPD in Paracentrotus lividus Embryos Exposed to Amniotic Fluid from Residents Living Close to Waste Landfill Sites

J Biomed Biotechnol. 2010;2010:251767.

Figure 2

Figure 2

Comparison of developmental defects and mortality in P. lividus embryos following exposure to sperms. The gray bar represents the untreated negative control (C0). Unpolluted and polluted amniotic liquid-induced developmental defects are represented, respectively, by white and black bars. P1, per cent larval malformations; P2, per cent developmental arrest at blastula/gastrula stage; D, per cent embryonic mortality, N, normal larvae. Results are expressed as means ± SE from six separate experiments.

Assessment of DNA Damage by RAPD in Paracentrotus lividus Embryos Exposed to Amniotic Fluid from Residents Living Close to Waste Landfill Sites

J Biomed Biotechnol. 2010;2010:251767.

Figure 3

ENVIRONMENT: Dioxin Levels Soar on Icelandic Farms

http://www.ipsnews.net/2011/02/environment-dioxin-levels-soar-on-icelandic-farms/#

Civil Society, Development & Aid, Environment, Europe, Headlines, Health

ENVIRONMENT: Dioxin Levels Soar on Icelandic Farms

By Lowana VealReprint

| | http://ipsnews-net.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/themes/ips-oomph/images/printer.pngPrint |

Lowana Veal

REYKJAVIK, Feb 26 2011 (IPS) – In the northwestern Icelandic town of Isafjordur, milk is causing pandemonium. A local milk marketing board recently tested one farm’s milk for the presence of harmful chemicals. Dioxin, and dioxin-like compounds, were found to be present in amounts higher than the recommended maximum levels, threatening the future of local farmers, and angering residents.

Dioxins are highly toxic compounds produced as a byproduct in some manufacturing processes, notably herbicide production and paper bleaching. They are a serious and persistent environmental pollutant.

The milk that was tested came from a farm called Efri-Engidalur, located in a valley only 1.5 kilometres from a waste-burning incinerator that was closed by the authorities last year due to consistently high levels of pollutants.

“Usually, measurements are done by the authorities, but we decided to test for dioxin because we were concerned about the incinerator,” said Einar Sigurdsson, of MS Iceland Dairies.

As a result of the findings, the Icelandic Food and Veterinary Authority (IFVA) decided to test samples of milk, meat, and hay from several farms in the surrounding area.

The findings revealed increased levels of dioxin and dioxin-like compounds in the majority of the samples. Dioxin-like compounds are polychlorinated biphenyls, commonly known as dioxin-like PCBs, which behave like dioxin, so are generally classified with it in terms of toxicity.

In 2007, the Environment Agency of Iceland (EAI) measured emissions from waste incinerators. According to regulations of the European Commission, the executive arm of the European Union, maximum emission levels of dioxin should not exceed 0.1 ng/m3.

“The emission levels are measured per cubic metre in the exhaust from the incinerator rather than total emissions. As a result, an incinerator that burns more waste but has a lower emission measurement can emit more dioxin,” explains Sigridur Kristjansdottir from the EAI.

However, in 2007, emission levels in Isafjordur were 21 times the maximum EC regulation level.

In addition, concern has arisen in the small town of Kirkjubaejarklaustur, in South Iceland, where dioxin levels were recorded at 95 times the maximum exposure level in 2007. And in Vestmannaeyjar, an island just off South Iceland, the dioxin level was 84 times the maximum exposure standard.

In all three cases, the results were sent to the Ministry for the Environment but were not released publicly.

In Kirkjubaejarklaustur, the waste incinerator is located in the same complex as the local school, sports centre, swimming pool, and music school. The original plan had been to use the waste heat from the incinerator to heat the surrounding buildings.

When the dioxin level was revealed, local residents became angry and demanded that the plant not operate while children were at school. One parent, civil engineer Oddur Bjarni Thorarensen, took his children out of the school.

But, according to Kristjansdottir from the EAI, “in the environmental impact assessment for the plant, the pollution dispersal forecast indicated that maximum pollution levels would be expected to occur at a distance of about 150 metres from the plant (relative to open areas).”

“This assessment was one of the items produced to justify that pollution levels would not be expected to be high in the immediate vicinity of the incinerator,” says Kristjansdottir.

The Infectious Disease Control division of the Directorate of Health has decided to monitor residents of Isafjordur, Kirkjubaejarklaustur, and Vestmannaeyjar for the presence of dioxin.

“It is possible to scan for possible dioxin by testing hair for lead. A positive test indicates that dioxin may be present,” says Gudrun Sigmundsdottir, head of the department.

Steingrimur Jonsson, the farmer from Efri-Engidalur, says that no one has come yet to take samples from him. He and his family have regularly been consuming milk and meat from their 20 cows and 80 sheep.

“But since dioxin was found in the milk, we have stopped eating our produce,” he said.

Dioxin is an accumulative toxin and is not considered to be particularly toxic to humans unless a lot of produce containing it is consumed – as could well be the case for farmers, who tend to eat a lot of home-produced food.

But, if dioxin levels were too high in 2007 at three plants, when did the dioxin pollution begin? And what will this mean for the future of Iceland’s livestock industry?

“They can tell how long the pollution has been going on by taking soil samples, which they have done. But it’s a slow process,” says Jonsson.

He sees no future for livestock in his area. “Not if the milk and meat cannot be sold,” he told IPS.

Last year, 384 sheep were slaughtered near Isafjordur. These yielded about 6.5 tonnes of meat, of which almost five tonnes were sold overseas to the UK and Spain. Because the meat had not been tested for dioxin, all of the lamb has since been recalled as a precautionary measure.

Ironically, in the lead-up to the 1992 Rio conference on Agenda 21, it was Iceland that originally suggested that international controls be implemented to measure the release of persistent organic pollutants (POPS), including dioxin, and their impact on the environment.

But, as secretary general of the environment ministry Magnus Johannesson told IPS, “there was little enthusiasm for this on the international level.”

The POPS Convention was eventually agreed in Stockholm in 2001, while regulation on the release of pollutants from waste-burning incinerators began in the EC in 2003. Operators of incinerators were given five years to conform to the new regulations.

However, “because the four waste-burning incinerators that were operating according to old licences had so little throughput, the EC agreed that these plants did not have to improve their technology while they were operating,” says Johannesson.

The four plants include the now-closed incinerator near Isafjordur, the plants at Kirkjubaejarklaustur and Vestmannaeyjar, and a plant at Svinafell that was not measured for dioxin in 2007. The latter is used mostly in summer for burning tourist waste.

Environment minister calls for increased recycling and waste sorting

April 25 2012

Edward Yau on yet another overseas trip as Environment Minister took a junket group of freeloaders to Copenhagen to study their incinerator, then on to UK to ride a hybrid bus and then visit a Scottish whiskey distillery.

Perhaps he should go back to Denmark now and suggest to CY Leung that they follow Denmark’s paradigm policy shift.

Better still, just issue him a one-way ticket.

http://cphpost.dk/national/environment-minister-calls-increased-recycling-and-waste-sorting

THE COPENHAGEN POST

Environment minister calls for increased recycling and waste sorting

Andreas Jakobsen

August 26, 2013 – 19:52

Environment minister’s new strategy would force residents to take a hands-on approach to reducing Denmark’s carbon emissions

img_src

Environment minister Ida Auken wants us to sort our rubbish (Photo: Scanpix)

The environment minister, Ida Auken (Socialistisk Folkeparti), has penned out a new strategy that may mean a “paradigm shift” in the way we handle our rubbish.

In a few weeks, the government will present a strategy that will require households to sort their waste into several bins rather than sending the majority of it to the incinerator.

“Danes will have to sort more of their waste. The goal is definitely to recycle more and incinerate less. That is a paradigm shift for Denmark, because so far, we have been the world champions of waste incineration,” Auken told Politiken newspaper.

Approximately 50 percent of all household rubbish is burned at incinerator plants that convert rubbish into energy for residential electricity and heat. Incineration plants are highly efficient in turning all kinds of waste into energy, but with that comes carbon dioxide emission levels that exceed the goals set under the Kyoto Protocol.

READ MORE: Government lays financial foundation for greener future

Positive initiative
The waste organisation Dakofa, which is made up of 244 members working with various aspects of waste management, was pleased with the minister’s announcement.

Morten Petersen, the head of Dakofa, thinks that the ideal arrangement would be separate rubbish cans for incineration and for waste that is unsuitable for burning. Larger receptacles should then be provided for several types of dry recyclable waste such as cardboard, iron, plastic and bottles.

“In general, people will have to meet more demands. In the beginning they may have to pay for the rubbish cans themselves, but there can also be a positive economic outcome if we use the materials better,” Petersen said.

According to the environment minister, increased recycling and waste sorting in ten trial councils has already reduced rubbish costs, but no specifics were given.

A similar plastic recycling pilot project was carried out in Copenhagen two years ago. Residents who took part in the year-long project said they were satisfied with the new service, while the sanitation workers who collected the additional recyclables reported that the new system did not make their jobs any more difficult.

READ MORE: City’s plastic waste gets new LIFE

Councils want proof
The councils who own the incineration centres have called for some documentation that increased recycling will be worth the costs.

“We would like to recycle more if it can be documented that it makes sense for us to do so. We are waiting to see that sort of documentation,” Anders Christensen, an environmental consultant for the local government association Kommunernes Landsforening, told Politiken.

Waste sorting is not enough
This is not the first time that waste sorting has been discussed.

In 2011, a study by the Technical University of Denmark (DTU), revealed that incineration meant that Denmark emitted 70,.000 more tonnes of carbon dioxide yearly than originally thought and the nation was exceeding the carbon dioxide goals under the Kyoto Protocol.

READ MORE: Denmark’s carbon bomb

In an interview with The Copenhagen Post in 2011, DTU associate professor Thomas Astrup said that simply separating waste is not necessarily enough to reduce emissions.

“If the plastic can be sorted out in clean fractions and recycled properly to make new plastic, then it’s a good idea. But if it’s not clean, it can only be recycled into secondary materials, which saves less new plastic and less carbon dioxide emissions. Then it is better to incinerate the plastic in Denmark at high efficiency,” Astrup said.

An EU directive requires all member countries to recycle at least 50 percent of paper, plastic, metal and glass waste before 2020. At the moment, Denmark does not live up to those requirements and incinerates more and recycles less than our neighbours in Germany and Sweden.

It takes determination
So far, neither Auken or Dakofa have been able to give an estimate of how much increased waste sorting is going to cost.

Nevertheless, Auken is determined to change the general attitude towards recycling.

“Recycling should be common sense and come to us naturally. I know that Danes want to [recycle their rubbish]. But it takes determination to keep us going in the right direction,” Auken told Politiken.

The government will present the final resource strategy in its entirety in the upcoming weeks.

Related articles:

Government lays financial foundation for greener future

Denmark’s carbon bomb

City’s plastic waste gets new LIFE

Still Adjusting | The great green swindle

Integrating airports, not another runway, is long-term solution

dynamco Aug 31st 2013
9:19am

people should think on why the HKZHM bridge came about
Zhuhai airport was not allocated any international destinations
HK Airport Authority owns 55% of the company which operates Zhuhai airport
So the bridge will bring export airfreight from Zhuhai to Chep Lap Kok
a second reason for building the bridge is ……………………………. ?

rpasea Aug 31st 2013
6:53am

“Think big”….there was an article in the press about Singapore’s “think big” plans and one element would be applicable to HK: Singapore will move its container port to a more remote area and build a new city in the current location. Why not move Kwai Chung container port to China, where it belongs, and build a new city there? We could have another Taikoo Shing (Kwai Chung Shing?) located close to the major employments areas and with infrastructure in place. Why build a new Shatin in the remote NT when we can build a new town in a better location?

South China Morning Post

Published on South China Morning Post (http://www.scmp.com)

Home > Integrating airports, not another runway, is long-term solution



Integrating airports, not another runway, is long-term solution

Saturday, 31 August, 2013, 12:00am

CommentLetters

I agree with your editorial (“Stop bickering and think big [1]“, August 20) as Hong Kong has moved down through the gears since the 1997 handover, and it seems that we are now driving with the handbrake on, despite our powerful fiscal position.

The Kai Tak site offered an opportunity to think big, but our cruise terminal is underwhelming. The grand vision of the Central waterfront is already a disappointment.

West Kowloon’s woodland park shows no signs of life. Our competitors such as Shanghai and Singapore would have implemented significantly more at these unique and dramatic locations. Hong Kong has lost its confident wide vision, and now bureaucratically seeks blinkered reactive solutions. The transport situation in the Pearl River Delta also illustrates this view.

The Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau bridge is catering only to narrow vested interests. The present push for a third runway at Chek Lap Kok is an easy orthodox response but avoids having to think outside the box. There is ample aircraft runway capacity in the delta region but a severe shortage of airspace.

It is the most congested airspace in China: besides Chek Lap Kok, Guangzhou Baiyun, Shenzhen Baoan, Zhuhai Jinwan, and Macau airports are competing for this space. It is a case of “one country, five airports”, and despite official pledges of co-operation and the signing of a memorandum of understanding in 2011 there appears little movement to control airspace centrally.

In the delta region, each airport is “paddling its own canoe”. If London acted in this unco-ordinated manner with City, Gatwick, Heathrow, Luton, Southend and Stansted airports there would be air traffic chaos. It is common sense to closely integrate Chek Lap Kok, Macau, Zhuhai, and Shenzhen under a single management. Just adding runway capacity at Hong Kong is not a solution. Public transport needs must trump private commercial interests.

It should have been a “no-brainer” to extend our Airport Express line to these three airports, but ludicrously the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau bridge only serves road traffic – contrary to government policy of giving precedence to rail.

We need a rapid and secure transport system to whisk travellers between these four airports. Instead of spending billions of dollars on the ecologically damaging reclamation for a third runway, authorities should invest into the vanguard of Elon Musk’s “Hyperloop” high-speed-transit system. The pneumatic tube ferrying the passengers could be mounted on the Hong Kong-Zhuhai bridge. It would also create some excitement about Hong Kong as we become increasingly dull.

Charlie Chan, Mid-Levels



No cover-up over leak at Tuen Mun landfill, says Christine Loh

Friday, 30 August, 2013, 9:54pm

NewsHong Kong

Stuart Lau stuart.lau@scmp.com

An environment official assured the public yesterday that there had been no cover-up about a waste leak from a landfill and vowed to be open in handling questions about it.

Christine Loh Kung-wai, Acting Secretary for the Environment, said there had been only one instance so far of effluent leaking from the Ta Kwu Ling rubbish dump, as the Environmental Protection Department officers had reported on Wednesday.

And despite residents’ fears, it was “not true” that there had been a similar leak at the Tuen Mun landfill.

Loh said officers who went to the Tuen Mun facility after receiving complaints found that the pollution was a mix of surface runoff and soil, not leachate, the toxic moisture that oozes from stacked rubbish.

It was the first time a political appointee from the Environment Bureau had responded to accusations that there had been a cover-up because the government had taken a month to disclose the Ta Kwu Ling leak.

Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing is expected to resume work today after a holiday.

Loh said no health or ecological damage had resulted from the Ta Kwu Ling incident and promised the bureau would continue to take questions and inquiries about the site.

“We want to be, and I think we are being, open and transparent. Of course we welcome your continuing questions,” she said.

The bureau would arrange a site visit for the Legislative Council environmental affairs panel tomorrow.