Posts: 820
Threads: 106
Joined: Mar 2006
I've been accused of being a hypocrite because I've supported things like HSF. But I'm not supporting this waste incinerator
proposal. I need to clear the up some misconceptions here.
Firstly for the people who are not aware,this project is planned at NELHA. There is 30 businesses which do everything from bottle the deep sea water to aquaculture.Thus this is a very environmentally sensitive area that a waste incinerator would have an adverse impact upon.
Secondly,there is a significant amount of residential subdivisions (which I live in one of them) which this proposed waste incinerator would have a negative impact upon.
Lastly, NELHA is by Kona Int'l Airport. What great first introduction to Kona to the tourists that arrive here seeing a waste incinerator after they disembark from the plane.
I've supported projects like Hokulia, or HSF in the past. I've also criticized the environmentalists for slowing those latter projects down and hindering progress here.
Thus why on the surface, I look like a hypocrite. But in reality I'm not. I evaluate each of these projects in a case by case basis.
I originally had very strong reservations against both the HSF and Hokulia. The tide turned when the courts intervened and blocke both of these projects AFTER government approvals were granted. It frankly doesn't sit well with me when that happens.
Besides that, both of these projects have positive benefits that will help the surrounding communities and the state. A waste incinerator has no positive benefits.
Edited by - Aaron S on 12/10/2007 13:25:26
Posts: 8,472
Threads: 1,033
Joined: May 2003
The costs may well be a black hole. What has me puzzled is, if the county is contracting something, why can't that contract be for a fixed price at or below a council approved level?
If we budget for a $40 million WTE and it costs or bids more than that then don't buy it. Do something else.
In all my business experience there are a couple rules of thumb that might apply here:
1. Don't even approach a deal that you can't walk away from.
2. Always require clarity on what exactly is NOT included.
To Aaron: Come on now Aaron.... to say a WTE has no positive attributes is a little blind. The ability to recognize and evaluate the cost/ benefit of the positve and negative attrivbutes may lead one to any conclusion. But there are always positives and negatives.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Another question I have about this, does Hawaii even produce enough trash to make this effective.
Are we going to become the dumping grounds for the other islands?
Is the mainland going to be shipping trash to us now if we were to get something like this... geez... I don't even wanna think about that!
-----------------
Coming home soon!
Edited by - damon on 12/10/2007 14:28:40
Posts: 1,779
Threads: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
Good stuff here. Let's look under a few rocks...
Yes, Aaron started this thread re the phantom proposal for an incinerator at NELHA. Thanks, Aaron -- and I sincerely mean that.
However, given that the proposed Hilo incinerator may be going to Council funding within a month or two, it will do as a case to look at.
"...reducing the amount of rubbish..."
Absolutely -- this county generates something like 8 to 9 lbs per person per day of stuff to go to the landfill. The state average is about 5 to 6 and the national average is 4 to 5.
"How is burning oil better than burning trash?"
This is not the point -- burning oil is not the limit of our options. The proposed Hilo incinerator would produce 3+MW, about 2% of the electricity now used on this island. Furthermore, because that juice would be generated on the East side where generation already exceeds use, all of it will be sent across the island to where use exceeds generation; and in doing so, lots of it will be lost in the lines.
How much would we save if every light in every house, office, and store on the island was changed from energy-gobbling incadescent bulbs to those that use less energy?
The proper question is: "What would it cost to generate 3+MW from a truly renewable, low maintenace source: solar or mini-hydro (possibly the most underutilized on this island)? Or, even wind (renewable, but with more upkeep than solar or mini-hydro).
Cost: Early numbers were $35-$40 million. Now, talk is about about $100 million or more.
Paying for WTE is a different kind of animal. The upfront construction can be only the start. Like this: 'put or pay' provisions require the County to send a minimum amount of feedstock to be burned, or pay anyway! This is at the heart of how incineration destroys recycling efforts.
As I previously indicated, I have conducted research regarding WTE for the last 2 years and have a lot of detailed info, links, and references. Way too much to post here. Anyone who wants it, contact me: gardengreen@hawaiiantel.net.
James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
Posts: 8,472
Threads: 1,033
Joined: May 2003
One could certainly wish that the waste was not there to think about burning.
The landfill, threatened to close, will remain a tepid soup leaching into our watershed for many generations. Out-of-sight, out-of-mind isn't sufficient.
If a WTE could function cleanly without taking us to the cleaners it might be possible to mine the landfill over the years and remove it completely. That seems quite interesting - if practical and possible.
I am certainly prepared to listen to James conclusions while not quite making my own yet.
Reduce and recycle worries me. A worthy goal no doubt. The town I came from was very successful in reducing and recycling - with a catch. At that landfill every pickup load of trash carries a charge of $35. It takes a LOT of labor and cost to sort, sort, sort and separate.
If there was a $1 charge per pickup load here I am afraid that 70% of the trash would go directly into the bushes. The diversion and reduce effort would be a great success. The rest of the aina and island would suffer.
This lovely island is about 30 years behind the times in environmental awareness and ability. The day will have to come when all the mentioned solutions are employed broadly and willingly.
James, we should talk more about waste stream technology and the potentials for manufacturing locally (here).
I still want to know more about WTE. Even if I should end up rejecting it I want to be sure I know precisely why.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 820
Threads: 106
Joined: Mar 2006
quote:
To Aaron: Come on now Aaron.... to say a WTE has no positive attributes is a little blind. The ability to recognize and evaluate the cost/ benefit of the positve and negative attributes may lead one to any conclusion. But there are always positives and negatives.
To me this proposal is a lose, lose situation. Just imagine if they tried to build a waste incinerator by your home in Puna....
I will state this publicly, I will do everything in my power to fight this proposal.I've lived here in Kona almost 32 years.A facility of this nature has no business being built in such a environmentally sensitive area such as NELHA.
Posts: 8,472
Threads: 1,033
Joined: May 2003
Aaron, I have no challenge to your position. You have every right to oppose it to your full ability. My point is that blanket opposition - all black, no white -does nothing to educate or convince me.
If you have convinced yourself - and it appears you have, and you hope to convince others, which is your moral right and even obligation, convince me with persuasive logic. Not emotion.
Best wishes. I admire your work and spirit.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 1,595
Threads: 111
Joined: May 2007
I've visited cities with effective recycling programs (read: mandatory). People sort their trash and put it to the curb on certain days. The truck comes and picks it up.
Ever cynical, I don't see people sorting and hauling trash to transfer stations on their own. Some people can't even pack out their rubbish and diapers from a fishing trip.
It's my opinion that mandatory sorting and home pick up is the only way to approach a no waste goal.
Difficult and expensive, yes, but it could be paid for partially by taxing packaging.
There was opposition to the Hi-5 bottle "tax", but it's proved very effective in moving plastic and glass bottles from the roadside to recycling centers.
A packaging tax would also incourage bulk purchasing which would decrease solid waste.
Posts: 310
Threads: 26
Joined: Feb 2004
We just finished a WTE project here at the cement plant I work at. Everything from tires to candy bar wrappers are used. The substitution rate for coal is up to 16% now. I like to think it is better for the environment, it burns cleaner than coal and it doesn't end up in a landfill.
Scott
Posts: 8,472
Threads: 1,033
Joined: May 2003
Scott, A WTE facility at a cement plant? Sounds very small scale. Intriguing. Could you find out more. Who? When? Where? and How much?
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
|
