Why incineration is not an option!

Friends of the Earth Malta has always lobbied for sensible waste management solutions and believes that Malta's waste management strategy is putting this country on the right track.

FoE Malta would like to see a change of culture where waste is concerned. We primarily favour decisions that lead to minimising waste creation but, once waste is generated, it is better to put it to some practical use. What we throw away should be considered a resource rather than something to be merely removed from sight.

Several people have written in the media supporting the idea of incineration as a waste disposal solution. Unfortunately, most, if not all, the pro-burn advocates, fail to weigh up the options carefully and leave doubts in people's minds about the subject.

John C. Ripard was the latest to take up the cause for incineration and in his article - without a proper examination of the subject - he concluded: "I firmly believe that an in-depth study of the problem with an examination of the pros and cons of both dumping and incineration will show that the disadvantages of dumping far outweigh those of incineration, and conversely the advantages of incineration far outweigh those of dumping."

This is an extremely unfair statement and Friends of the Earth Malta hopes, in this article, to set the record straight once and for all by demonstrating that Malta does not need, and should not choose, incineration as a waste management option.

Mr Ripard and others that favour incineration speak of an either/or option - a landfill or an incinerator. Well that option just does not exist. Even if Malta has an incinerator, it will still need a landfill.

Some waste cannot be incinerated and that includes incinerator ash that must be landfilled. Certain toxic waste from industry would also be safer in a landfill rather than being turned into toxic gasses attacking our lungs. Much of Malta's waste is plastic and burning plastic is both uneconomical - since it can be recycled - and dangerous, because of dioxins. Malta would do well to cut down on the volumes of plastic it creates and recycle what is put to use.

A close examination of the waste produced in Malta will indicate why incineration is not called for. As has been pointed out time and again, 80 per cent or more of Malta's waste is from construction and demolition. That should not go to landfill and would be best gathered in a stone depot for recycling. Malta does not have unlimited stone and the quarries are, as everyone will attest, a blot on the landscape.

The construction industry needs to be scaled down if we are going to have sustainable development, but still even if this is not achieved, all construction and demolition waste should be kept for eventual recycling. At the moment the price of virgin stone is too cheap - but in time recycled stone bricks will become a viable alternative.

Of the remaining 20 per cent of Malta's waste, more than half (about 60 per cent) of that is food and garden waste. Progett Skart has started waste separation at source and when this is spread to the entire country we will be able to use a large chunk of Malta's waste to make good quality compost.

Malta's soil is very poor in nutrients and compost is the natural fertiliser that it so desperately needs. It would be a scandal of the highest proportion to throw away valuable compost making material. Our waste could be passed on to the farmers and gardeners. The value of such compost at today's prices would run into the thousands of liri that we are literally throwing away. Certainly compostible material should not be incinerated.

That accounts to more than 90 per cent of Malta's waste which should not be fast-burned. The remaining less than 10 per cent is - according to studies carried out at our waste dumps - composed of plastic, paper, cardboard and cartons, glass bottles/jars, aluminium or metal cans, textiles and a very small percentage of hazardous waste.

Of these, paper, cardboard, glass, wood, metal can be reused or recycled. What is not easy to recycle is plastic. Does Mr Ripard expect that Malta should spend vast sums of taxpayers' money to incinerate plastic, much of which is PVC, that would be a danger to our health?

Incinerators are extremely expensive pieces of equipment and without going into a discussion on the possible impact of incinerators on health, I have this one question which I would like answered: since a state-of-the-art incinerator costs about Lm23 million, how do you justify that expense in view of the different waste streams in Malta?

I do not know if Mr Ripard lives near Maghtab - which has been identified as one of the best possible sites for a new landfill - but a few things should be clear in his mind. Even if Malta has an incinerator, someone will still live with a landfill in his/her vicinity. It is obvious that having to place an incinerator in Malta as well will only complicate matters.

FoE Malta is sure that given the right support and with the necessary political will, Malta could have a landfill that would make the country proud. A landfill that will not give off disgusting odours and would, in fact, be smell free.

Admittedly, waste driven through our streets and arriving at the new landfill, will be unpleasant for some - but everybody knows that Malta must have a landfill, and if we produce so much waste we cannot expect that disposing of it will be problem free.

Having said that, a properly engineered landfill can be aesthetically acceptable and the site at Ghallis would mean that it would be invisible from the main roads. FoE Malta is not suggesting that Ghallis is necessarily the best site and has called on the authorities to study all possible sites.

Despite years and years of mismanagement by administrations in the past, Malta is now on course to having a sustainable waste management regime and FoE Malta looks forward to seeing a study on the best possible site for a landfill so that we will eventually begin to enjoy the benefits of a professional waste management strategy.

Once again, FoE Malta calls on those who support incineration to make their case with reference to facts and figures. We have made this call several times and nobody has taken up the task.

FoE Malta would be more than willing to change its opinion on the subject if it can be proved wrong, but for now, we stand by our choice of waste disposal options.