In case you missed it this project is still in the works, some folk are concerned about this technology saying that it still pollutes the air and the residue if buried pollutes the ground. I ask is there ANY method of DISPOSAL (as opposed to reuse & recycle) that does not pollute, and is it not better to produce some energy (Hydro) during disposal and reduce the emissions and residues as much as possible? What do you think? Should Owen Sound (and other municipalities, including Toronto) be considering this type of solution for garbage disposal rather than shipping it out to someone else’s backyard?
Toronto Star Apr. 27, 2006. 06:56 AM
KERRY GILLESPIE AND JIM WILKES
STAFF REPORTERS
Southgate Township officials announced yesterday they have a deal with a private company to build a gasification facility that cooks garbage, producing a gas, that can be turned into electricity.
The demonstration facility is to be built in an industrial park south of Dundalk, 45 kilometres northwest of Orangeville.
More http://www.thestar.com/
Southgate Announcement March 22, 2006
We wish to announce today that Southgate is presently in confidential negotiations with a company to be a willing host for what we feel would an exciting project for our community. This project could provide a sound solution for our residual waste now going to landfill and significant economic benefits to this community. The company wishes to locate a demonstration plant in our Southgate Industrial Park. The Ministry of the Environment would have to issue a Certificate of Approval for the demonstration facility and monitor the system for environmental compliance. This demonstration plant would gasify 24 tonnes per day of municipal landfill waste which could long term, when approved produce energy.
More http://www.town.southgate.on.ca/BB/bbIndex.html
Comments
When discussing the
When discussing the gassificaton/incineration issue most people focus on the pollution problem. This of course leads to a debate about which is the worse of two evils; pollution out the stack or landfilling.
In my view this is not the primary issue. The arguement for turning garbage into energy rather than burying it is a compelling one since we have the garbage now and we must do something with it.
However I think most agree that the ultimate solution is to produce far less waste at the source. The problem arises when we find ourselves with millions invested in a gassification plant that now requires a constant fuel supply. We then find ourselves in a conflict of interest between waste reduction and gassification fuel.
Needless to say this would not be a healthy situation. One could argue that even if we can figure out how to better control our waste stream locally there will be more than enough garbage from other regions to fuel the plant.
The reality however is that a truly successful reduction in waste will have to be a provincial or national issue and SOON if we are to leave any resources for future generations.
Bottom line: we must become much better stewards of our resouces in Canada which makes gassification or incineration a short-term solution at best.
The main reason for this
The main reason for this comment is to respond to Rural's opinion about gassification/incineration posted under "A movement in the Making".
I also agree that this MAY be a viable SHORT-TERM solution to the garbage problem.
The reason it cannot be a long-term solution is that when one looks at the volume of waste required to "fuel" a gassification plant and then does the math one realizes very quickly that it will not be possible to produce enough waste within 5-10 years time to keep this option viable on a large scale. This is largely due to economic growth factors in Asia which will preclude the abundance of resources we currently consume.
At some point in the not too distant future we will be FORCED to reduce the PRODUCTION of waste (disposable goods, packaging, etc.) on a massive scale.
What may make gassification or incineration viable in the short-term is the economics of the return on investment. I would be interested to know the payback period of the proposed dundalk plant. If it is under 6 years I would see it as a much more viable option while we get Provincial and Federal waste responsibility laws in place.
Anything outide of 6 years (10 at the very most) and we will have trouble providing the "fuel".