[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: anyone ever heard of WTE incinerator with closed loop system?
I'm sorry to be cynical about this, but this appears to
be yet another trash-to-energy scheme that will ultimately
produce dioxins somewhere. Perhaps not as much as other
MSW incinerators in the air, but if it's not in the air, it's in
the ash. Then they will put it in concrete for roads, and
the dioxin will leach out...
The folks down there also better watch out for that
"long contract" language. Sounds like GAT (Guaranteed
Annual Tonnage): you pay the rate based on the
amount you signed up for. As recycling increases, so
does the price you pay per ton! A genuine dis-incentive
to recycling, facing many towns and cities in
From: Jackie Hunt Christensen <email@example.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Tuesday, September 23, 1997 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: anyone ever heard of WTE incinerator with closed loop system?
>I think this is what you're referring to. Whenever I hear "Louisiana" and
>"incineration" in the same breath, it makes me nervous!
> Firms Propose to Burn Waste New Technology Touted as
> The New Orleans Times-Picayune
> Fri, Sep 19 1997
> The River Region Caucus, a three-parish conglomerate
> that discusses issues concerning St. Charles, St. John
> the Baptist and St. James parishes, heard a
> presentation Thursday night for a long-term solution to
> solid waste disposal.
> Chip Efferson, director of the Environmental Closed
> Loop Incineration Process, told representatives from
> the three parishes that a plant jointly constructed by
> his company and EnerWaste would dispose of the
> parishes' waste without clogging landfills or emitting
> harmful gases.
> EnerWaste, a Washington state company, specializes in
> incinerating municipal waste. Efferson's company uses
> "closed-loop" technology to dispose of hazardous
> materials. Efferson said the combination would let
> plant operators destroy the three parishes'
> nonhazardous waste and earn supplemental income by
> disposing of tires.
> The combination of the two technologies has never been
> attempted before and representatives from both
> companies want the River Parishes to be one of the
> first areas in the world to try it.
> Efferson told the caucus the plant could accept 300
> tons of municipal waste a day and charge the parishes
> $28 per ton, a fee that would remain constant for at
> least three years.
> The parishes would pay nothing toward the plant's $30
> million construction cost.
> "We fully intend to raise 100 percent of the capital," ÃŠ
> EnerWaste representative David Reed said.
> But even though local governments would not be expected
> to pay for construction, Efferson said the contract
> would have to be long-term for plant operators to
> "We would need a 20-year commitment," he said.
> Efferson assured the caucus that the plant would be
> safe, so safe, he said, that nothing would be emitted
> into the air. Ash from incineration, he said, would be
> used to make concrete.
> "The beauty of the system is, at the end we come out
> with usable products," he said. "The air quality
> permits are filled in with zeroes."
> Some residents at the meeting expressed concern that
> the technologies Efferson and Reed were proposing had
> never been combined. But St. Charles Parish President
> Chris Tregre said the proposal deserves to be studied.
> "It has potential," he said, "and as long as there's no
> financial burden," it's worth examining. "The ultimate
> solution to solid waste disposal is going to come from
> new technology."
> (Copyright 1997)
>Jackie Hunt Christensen
>Food Safety Project Director
>Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy
>2105 1st Avenue South
>Minneapolis, MN 55404
>612-870-3424 (direct line)
>IATP's Endocrine Disrupter Resource Center: http://www.sustain.org/edrc