I live in Devon, England, where plans for two incinerators have been met with the contempt and opposition it deserves.
I lived in B.C. for many years and believe Metro Vancouver’s plans for a new mass burn incinerator to be very wrong and unnecessary.
When people ask proponents of incinerators why incineration has been chosen for waste management, they are consistently told it is needed because we can’t go on landfilling our garbage. Incineration produces energy, and in their opinion, poses no health risk.
This limited answer, however, never explains why incineration has been selected over all the other waste management technologies, which can also solve the landfill problem and dispose of large quantities of garbage in a cleaner way, can also produce energy from waste, and do not compete with recycling resources. It takes more energy to replace the materials being burnt than the small amount of energy the incinerator can produce.
Fortunately, we no longer live in the dark ages, we have the Internet. Check it out for yourselves, there is so much scientific and general information about incineration.
Scientific studies support the opinion that modern mass burn incinerators are just as harmful to health as the older versions because of ultrafine particulate emissions.
These other waste management technologies are also far less expensive to the taxpayer, and do not emit toxic nanoparticles which pass through all modern mass burn incinerator systems, and are dispersed into the environment contributing to air pollution for 25 to 30 years.
If Metro can only suggest incineration is the solution to landfill, provides energy and poses no health risk, I sure hope they are told politely of course to stick, sorry, I mean consign, their incinerator plans into the recycling bin and to choose a cleaner waste management technology worthy of all residents and the environment of the incredibly beautiful province of B.C.
Jennifer Evans
Ivybridge, Devon
England