Zero Waste “unattainable,” councillors look at incineration

Zero Waste “unattainable,” councillors look at incineration
September 10th, 2009
Media coverage of Sept.9 Simcoe County corporate services committee meeting

From the Orillia Packet and Times
….Clearview Township Mayor Ken Ferguson said he has reservations about abandoning Site 41.
“Everyone is responsible for their own garbage,” said Ferguson, whose municipality has been taking a lot of North Simcoe’s garbage over the last several years due to the ongoing Site 41 debate.
Ferguson said he’s received e-mails about the possibility of incineration or recycling facilities, but he said those options still require a landfill.
“There’s no sense dumping one (property) and have to go out and find more land,” said Ferguson, adding he needs more i n f o rmation about costs and specifics before making a final decision.
Ferguson said some of the newer technologies — such as incineration — could cost two or three times more than landfilling
…(Oro-Medonte Township Deputy Mayor Ralph Hough) wants county staff to investigate additional mining at local landfills to increase capacity, a process that has already been completed at some facilities.
“Time is of the essence,” Hough said. “We have a one-year moratorium. We can’t keep bouncing this around (between committees and sub-committees). Zero waste, in its truest sense, is not attainable, but it’s the right direction.”
Full story

From the Toronto Star
…Simcoe County has opened the door to sending its unrecyclable waste to a planned incinerator in Durham Region – a first step in scrapping Tiny Township’s notorious Dump Site 41.
“They’re interested and they’re willing, so let’s see what they have to say,” Oro-Medonte Township Deputy Mayor Ralph Hough told the county’s corporate services committee yesterday.
…the committee approved Hough’s motion to hear delegations from the energy-from-waste incinerator planned by York and Durham regions, as well as another from Dufferin County, which have expressed an interest in a deal with Simcoe County, as well as a private firm operating a similar facility near Ottawa.
A plan to look into mining dump sites across the county to recover and recycle valuable metals, plastics and building materials was also approved. A Simcoe County policy that prohibits exporting or importing trash could deter such plans, said County Warden Tony Guergis, who opposed mothballing Site 41 and doesn’t favour shipping the waste to an outside incinerator.
Full story

Edit | 12 Comments »

donna deneault says:
September 10, 2009 at 9:11 am  (Edit)
Everyone, call or email your councillors and say you want to move to Zero Waste – what are the first steps…let’s take them…one at a time.

We must make certain that Site 41 is closed permanently.

We can do it !

donna d.

donna deneault says:
September 10, 2009 at 9:27 am  (Edit)
I want to add, we have to stop putting garbage into the ground. That means closing Site 41 for good and not opening another landfill anywhere else…ever.

Thank you.

DD

cheryl davey says:
September 10, 2009 at 4:21 pm  (Edit)
I was recently at my mothers up in the Sudbury area. I always asked why don’t you use your composter. Her reply was the animals. Now they can recycle meat and bones as well as kitchen waste; by using green bins,like in Oshawa. I would realy like this to come to Peterborough as we recycle as much as we can. It would be one less item to ad to or waste pick up.

cheryl davey says:
September 10, 2009 at 4:31 pm  (Edit)
DON’T LET SITE 41 OR ANY OTHER SUCH SITE HAPPEN. WE WILL FEEL THE EFFECTS IN THE BABY BOOMERS AGE GROUP NO MATTER WHAT THEY THINK.AS A COMMENT WAS TOLD TO ME ONE DAY. I’LL BE DEAD BEFORE IT HAPPENS SO WHY WORRY IT WILL BE MY CHILDRENS CHILDRENS PROBLEM. WHAT A LEGACY TO LEAVE BEHIND’ OUTRAGEOUS!!!!!!!!

Kelly says:
September 10, 2009 at 5:12 pm  (Edit)
Oro-Medonte Township Deputy Mayor and County Councillor Ralph Hough is correct – time is of the essence! We must take immediate action to address our waste. This action should have occurred 20 years ago – but better late than never. Rather than spending more time and money re-examining the pro’s and con’s of landfills and incineration – let’s make do with and extend the 10-20+ years of landfill capacity that the County currently has. Set a goal of no more landfills and no more incinerators and please use your wisdom and leadership abilities to move us into a Zero Waste future.

It is discouraging to hear the “nay-sayers” repeat the same depressing story about waste – suggesting that the only way to deal with our wasted resources is to burn or bury them. Garbage is an example of an inefficient society. We must begin to recognize that when our wasted materials are not mixed together, they become useful resources. We also must soon realize that our ailing planet cannot stand much more abuse.

We have the ability to change direction and begin responsible programs that respect our resources, which can result in local employment and a stronger economy. Zero Waste is good for our society. Zero waste is possible. Zero Waste is a reality.

With strong political leadership, Simcoe County could lead Ontario into a Zero Waste future. Any other direction at this point leaves little hope for future generations. There is a beautiful future ahead – please have the courage to make a difference and lead us into a positive new direction NOW.

Scott M says:
September 10, 2009 at 8:56 pm  (Edit)
Could some one please explain what ZERO WASTE MEANS.Every one talks about it but do you realy understand and think it is that easy to achieve?
As for burning our garbage you still require a place to bury the ash.Again people talk about extending the life of dumps that are already 20 years old. The technology 20 years ago does not compare to the technology of site 41 so if i understand correctly you prefer to continue dumping in these sites but not one using new technologies?
I would also like to point out that there is a proposed compost site for the Bradford area and those residence do not want that in there back yards? We all produce waste so we must take care of it some how, until people who complian can show they produce ZERO WASTE from there homes how can they protest about waste?

Dave says:
September 11, 2009 at 6:33 am  (Edit)
The term “Zero Waste” may be taken literally. Re-use or re-cycle everything. Manage the entire product life cycle for all materials, processed or manufactured, so as to achieve this.

Who ever said it was easy? Nothing about this is easy. It is a choice whether the time, expense and efforts go into waste disposal or waste avoidance.

The difficulty for now is in making that choice.

We could start cleaning up existing landfill sites now. Start with mining for recyclables and removal of hazardous materials. We get a new goal and term “negative waste” – removing more from landfill sites than is put in.

The basic process is the same in old and so-called modern landfill sites – waste is left forever in a pile or hole in the ground, guaranteed liners or not.

Fact is the “modern” engineering of site 41 is held suspect by many and details – mod flow – remain hidden from the public.

Locating compost, ethanol and other odor- producing businesses near towns and cities will always face opposition. The businesses need to get better at managing the odors while seeking more suitable locations.

People cannot produce zero waste until the programs that re-use and re-cycle are more effective. Accept all recyclables, especially plastics, and only tender contracts insisting they are all collected and recycled.

Present residential waste composition is mainly plastics such as bags and packaging materials. Were this material recycled, waste collection could be cut in half today. That is 1/4 what it was only 2 years ago.

The politicians need to stop debating where to put waste and instead start deciding how to avoid producing waste and clean up existing landfills.

Mariane Cancilla says:
September 11, 2009 at 8:02 am  (Edit)
Is incineration all bad?

Perhaps it depends on the method or technology used. After reading the article in the Globe and Mail about the Ottawa company, Plasco Energy Group Inc.’s gasification process, I am not so sure.

I know that Denmark uses incineration and that the so called waste heat is used to heat hot water and homes. I also know that this country takes its environmental practices seriously.

Read the excellent article in Saturday, August 22nd.’s Globe and Mail’s Business section titled Garbage In Energy Out about a Canadian company that uses a gasification process to turn trash to energy.

The Ottawa company Plasco Energy Group Inc. takes residential garbage, removes the metals for recycling, shreds the waste, feeds it onto a conveyor belt for delivery to plasma-gasification system that transforms the garbage into a synthetic gas used to generate electricity … without emitting greenhouse gases … the process produces by-product like sulphur, water and a solid aggregate.

Read the whole article just Google Garbage In Energy Out article in Globe and Mail or here is the link to paste and copy.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/garbage-in-energy-out/article1260457/

York and Durham’s proposed $272 million incinerator is scheduled to be built by Covanta Energy Corp. a U.S. company
with a questionable past as far as the release of toxins goes.

Why not look at a Canadian company like the one mentioned in the Globe and Mail article … Plasco Energy Group Inc … their gasification process seems a wiser choice and the company is Canadian … providing jobs for Canadians as well.

I realize Zero Waste should be our ultimate goal and that it is possible with both a personal and political will, but wonder if a gasification process provided by a company like Plasco Energy Group Inc. would be worth looking into as well.

Ann Truyens says:
September 11, 2009 at 11:26 am  (Edit)
While we do not want to let our guard down on Site 41, it is increasingly important to have our energies turned to the solution – Zero Waste. I grow increasingly concerned that our politicians will turn to the easy fix of “shipping it to Durham” – out of sight out of mind. If that is the case, Simcoe will have learned nothing.

I went to the Oro-Medonte Council meeting on Wednesday to tell them my views on this important matter. They were very receptive and expressed that my thoughts are very much in line with the goal and the actions of Oro-Medonte Council.

DM Ralph Hough told me that he had placed a five-point recommendation on the floor at the SC Corporate Services committee meeting on Tuesday which will be debated at their next meeting later this month. Included in his recommendations is that he wants the committee to invite representatives from different groups to come and speak about all the different options of dealing with garbage, including Zero Waste Simcoe.
DM Hough also wants county staff to investigate additional mining at local landfills to increase capacity. Rob McCullough said at last night’s CMC meeting that SC now has only 7 years capacity left at their dump sites!

However Warden Guergis said the bylaw should be dealt with first before any discussions are held on a new direction. This doesn’t make any sense. Why not look at all the different options first! He doesn’t want to ship SC garbage elsewhere, but he also doesn’t want to look at alternatives to DS41. I can’t figure him out! What is he up to now?

I was at the CMC meeting last night and Rob McCullough also talked about possibly sending the garbage to Durham. I know Warden Guergis just wants to wash his hands of the whole garbage situation and take the easy way out. However he seems to be reluctant to have the import/export bylaw changed for fear of having to possibly accept GTA’s garbage. So we need to keep pushing SC to focus on Zero Waste.

We need to raise awareness and make people accountable for the garbage they produce and have them become part of the solution. Living in a clean environment concerns and affects all of us. We need to take action now to protect our future generations. Together we can make Simcoe County become a leader in Zero Waste.

You can become a member of Zero Waste Simcoe at http://www.zerowastesimcoe.org/

donna deneault says:
September 11, 2009 at 11:56 am  (Edit)
I agree we need to move faster to Zero Waste, but in the meantime, should this month’s and next month’s garbage go into existing landfills?…or should we start looking at incineration? I don’t want us to move to incineration if it means dropping the ZERO WASTE…that would be wrong. Is the incineration plant they are looking at turn all of the garbage into clean gas/energy…with NO substance going to landfills?
I was assuming that we would only use incineration until Zero Waste is in full swing. If that is not the case, then we need to get onto Zero Waste faster. I for one am talking to my mayor about it this week.

Also, “reclamation” is a great idea, where you go into existing landfills and pull out all of the metals etc and recycle them.

Whatever we decide, one thing is for certain…Site 41 is a terrible mistake and should be closed at once. I cannot believe I am still reading comments that say Site 41 has all this wonderful new technology ?! Are their heads in the sand? The Modflow is junk science and we will soon see just that when they finally release it. You don’t put garbage on top of the purest water in the world !

Donna

donna deneault says:
September 11, 2009 at 12:03 pm  (Edit)
One more important comment…if you speak to councillors or residents who say that Site 41 was a cheaper solution, make sure you remind them …when the costing was done on Site 41, no one factored in the cost of CLEAN UP. Also, if the leachate gets into the ground water we could never return it to its original purity.

I still worry that the water at the Parnell Farm (and any others that are experiencing turbidity in their water) will never return to its former state. That is another huge sin about the dump site. All we can do is pray that the water does return to the way it was. — Donna

dan kellar says:
September 12, 2009 at 12:31 pm  (Edit)
if the mayors citing the high costs of non-landfill options take into the account that the cost of putting in a new water filtration plant plus all the infrastructure to get people off of contaminated wells, then that 2 or 3 times as much figure quickly evaporates.

protecting the environment saves money in the long run, and taking real responsibility for ones refuse includes paying for its safe and responsible disposal (consume less and you need to get rid of less).

short term profits are not responsible when you pass on the long term costs. stop acting like there is no next generation.