OT:
Heck... while were at... Let's build a prison down South Point too.
Let the prisoners sort through the trash to seperate recycling etc as their work jobs.
-------
Today in History
The Supreme Court ruled in Dred Scott v. Sandford that slaves were not citizens, 1857
Posts: 820
Threads: 106
Joined: Mar 2006
This is testimony I sent to the council in regards to this proposal:
Aloha,
I hope you will reject the building a waste incinerator in Hilo. Firstly I strongly feel Wheelabrator's proposal too expensive for this island to build. On top of that, I believe this plant will be huge financial drain on this islands taxpayers for years to come.
But those latter concerns pale in comparison to the environmental havoc this plant will have on this island. We already have a bad enough vog problem. This plant will most likely exacerbate that problem. Another concern is what will happen to the toxic ash byproduct of this plant.
I really believe Hawaii County needs to explore beefing up recycling and explore building a new Hilo landfill in one of the old Glover quarry areas in Waiakea instead of building this waste incinerator. If the latter doesn't completely solve Hilo's waste problems, I would support trucking Hilo's trash to West Hawaii's landfill.
I previously did not support trucking Hilo's trash to West Hawaii. But when I found out that there is a proposal to build a waste incinerator at NELHA, I changed my mind. To me trucking Hilo's trash to West Hawaii is the lesser of two evils. I don't want to be living next to a waste incinerator, nor do I believe the DHHL homesteaders in Waiakea would like like to be living near a waste incinerator either.
As I end this testimony, I would urge the council to consider passing a resolution banning the building of any waste incinerators on this beautiful island.
Best Regards,
Aaron Stene
Posts: 1,581
Threads: 26
Joined: Jun 2007
Jerry, you raise some very good points.
First, the energy component is indeed a Trojan Horse. The sole purpose is to get rid of the trash. The fact that energy is produced is more for marketing of this plan than the purpose.
Incinerators do require massive oversight and H-Power has proven time and time again how little it actually gets. But having seen private incinerators operate we will differ on this. Where incinerators go bad is when municipalities are forcing target tonnage amount to be burnt. If a private incinerator goal is to produce power while staying below emission standard, they will accomplish it. But when government gets involved, all they want is the trash gone.
But the most important point you made (and made by Aaron as well) is recycling. A landfill or incinerator reduces the need for recycling. If it becomes as easy or easier to bury or burn material, why bother recycle?
But even recycling programs go to the dogs when government gets too involved.
Example 1: Browning-Ferris operates a municipal solid waste program. They are paid a set amount per ton of garbage they collect. If they dump the material at the landfill they pay a set tonnage amount slightly higher than they are paid for collecting. Overall, they deposit 30% of the collected material in the landfill. Somehow they are finding markets for the remaining 70%. What money they make is their business and government stays out of the picture.
Example 2: WMX Technologies Inc. operates a municipal solid waste. They are paid a fixed amount per household to collect the trash. They are not charged for tipping at the landfill. WM however, must pay the municipality a percentage of the recycling income they make. Almost 60% of the collected tonnage end up in the landfill.
Reason: B&F incentive is to reduce landfill tippage. The more they keep out of the landfill, the more they can make. They may find a market for certain waste items that pays well, and there are those that pays too little to be worth the cost of recycling. But if they can use excess income on the good payers to offset the cost of the little payers, it still results in less garbage to the landfill. They have found markets for just about everything but putrid waste. WMX doesn’t have the excess proceeds to develop or offset markets because government has its hand out looking for their cut at every turn. If they find a market for garbage cloth paying $1 but it cost them 75 cents to process for recycling, and government is demanding 30 cent as their cut, take it to the landfill.
When USAWS took over our community trash pickup, the county pays them the average monthly rate it cost the county to collect & handle the waste. USAWS handles their own transfer/sorting center. They took in trash and recycling. They paid standard landfill rates when dumping. They originally wanted only plastics, glass, paper, and metal. But because our county does not have it’s hand out looking to make money off the solid waste program and because they simple said we’ll pay you (USAWS) what it was costing us, the program is very successful. Now USAWS wants just about everything in the recycling bin and if it’s too big, they will schedule a pickup. They take mixed metals like appliances, furniture, cars, cloth, wood, electronics, ceramics, and even mirrors. If it has any recycling value, they want it. They offer hazardous waste drop-off at their center. Just last month they dropped off a small container for us to stuff our plastic bags in and they will collect it every other month. Many living on the mainland will recognize this “Unwashed recyclables are not to be placed in recycle bin, including greasy food containers or pizza boxes. No mixed metals. No glass windows. Wood is not acceptable for recycling.” I get to throw all those in my bin. It works because the private company’s incentive is to keep landfill loads to the minimum and make profits on everything else and government isn’t always trying to get a cut.
Unfortunately, Hawaii County can’t even get the bottle deposit correct so a full recycling program may just be too much for them.
quote:
Originally posted by Bob Orts
.......
Unfortunately, Hawaii County can’t even get the bottle deposit correct so a full recycling program may just be too much for them.
It's a Statewide problem.
The way they implemented the whole program was a mess.
Until people get into the habit of recycling, I don't believe recycling will be the end all to the problem.
Soon we will be facing a whole new bag of products that need to be recycled.
TV's as we move to the Digital Era, Computers are constantly getting tossed, Etc.
Incineration can work... I just wish it was located somewhere that the winds won't affect the Environment so much.
Were all gonna pay for this one way or the other.[V]
-------
Today in History
The Supreme Court ruled in Dred Scott v. Sandford that slaves were not citizens, 1857
Posts: 2,402
Threads: 145
Joined: Apr 2005
Posted - 03/05/2008 : 19:43:47
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob, your sarcasm is not appreciated at all. You wouldn't have to live
next that proposed NELHA waste incinerator and all the harmful environmental consequences.
I LOVE BOB"S SARCASM, and his final solution was tops too!
mella l
mella l
Art and Science
bytheSEA
Posts: 1,779
Threads: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
Lots of points on the floor here.
After about 20 months of research, I have been able to learn a bit about this matter (really, more than I wish I had the occasion to learn!) and will try to put some light on a few:
1) Recycling.
The potential is hardly tapped on this island. HI-5 is only a small bit of the bigger recycling picture.
About 25% of everthing (HI-5 plus lots more) that is recyclable gets recycled on this island now. That can be changed in 3 years or less -- people who have done it in multiple communities are now putting a proposal to the Council, and, separately, to the Dept of EnvMgt.
Despite what the County-paid consultants and Wheelabrator have said in public documents, incineration does compete with recycling. On this island, recycling of cardboard and plastic would cease to happen since those two are the most important high-Btu materials for burning.
Recycling is only one, though a major, way to avoid the need for burying or burning.
Re-use is a booming market where it is done right -- the forthcoming proposal mentioned above includes a strong re-use component, especially for construction and demolition materials (most of which can not be burned in an incinerator).
Like recycling, re-use can be working within a few years and continue to grow from there.
In the longer-term of 5 to 30 years (the period covered by the proposed incinerator) reduction has a lot to offer. This is called 'producer responsibility', where generation of waste is reduced upstream from its ultimate use through changes in product design, packaging, materials use, etc. that will reduce the amount to be burned, buried, or even recycled! This is already taking place in Europe, and in some communities in the USA.
The initial steps to producer responsibility are also in the above forthcoming proposal.
2)'Waste-to-Energy' is a RUSE.
Ask this: is $125million + the best way to produce 2% or less of the island's electricity?
(Anyone got some figures for generating the same amount of electricity as the proposed incinerator, ~3mW, by solarPV or wind?)
3) Pollutants: dioxin (most toxic chemical on the planet; a known carcinogen); heavy metals (lead, cabmium, mercury that accumulate in the food chain causing multiple health problems including brain damage in children and genetic mutation); nitrous oxide (a greenhouse gas more harmful than methane or carbon dioxide).
EPA regulations and 'modern technology' are given as the assurance that the community will be safe, even though neither regulations nor technology have prevented other communities from exposure to pollutants emitted by waste-to-energy incinerators (I have the case studies, see below).
...
...
There is MUCH, MUCH more.
For anyone who would like more information, email me at
gardengreen@hawaiiantel.net
For example, I have an 8-page document that summarizes all of the testimony I have submitted to County Council.
There are also one-page summaries and FAQ's.
And, there are several Internet links as well as other references I can send to you.
btw: if someone with the sharps to do so would like to post any or all of this information on a website (which I do not have) please let me know and we'll work it out.
James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
James...
I understand the concept " incineration does compete with recycling" and while I do have faith in us humans to eventualy do the right thing... i just don't think the current generation(s) of people have the mindset.
ie; We are a lazy society. It's much easier to toss something then to clean/sort/store/etc.
Until society as a whole gets educated... people will continue to toss instead of reuse.
Remember... We are humans and it's in human nature to leave a mess. [xx(]
Don't get me wrong... I do think recycling is a good thing and I make my bi-weekly runs for my measley $2.05 or what ever I get for it (I think I spend more time and gas just traveling to the recycling place then I get in return)
So where is the waste? I spend $5.00 in gas and time to get back $2.05?
Until recycling can be done the right way... it's not the most effective and immediate answer.
Educating our kids of today so that they in turn can educate there kids... might be a start...and we are slowly doing that now... but we don't have 30 - 50 years to wait.
We need to do something with our garbage now.
-------
Today in History
The Great Mahele (land division) was signed into law, 1848
From todays tribune:
...and council members interviewed Thursday were far from any consensus on whether the project is right for East Hawaii....
An up or down vote by the full board is at least six months away. Meanwhile, council members said they'll be looking for more definite numbers and gauging public reaction.....
Hamakua Councilman Dominic Yagong said he was the sole dissenting vote in an executive session
Hear this Council:
I want the thing built on the West Side
Isn't there also some sort of rule protecting what is said in Executive Sessions? By the Councilman stating what he did in the Executive session, isn't that some kind of violation?
-------
Today in History
The Great Mahele (land division) was signed into law, 1848
Posts: 1,779
Threads: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
'Reduce, Re-Use, Recycle' and 'Zero Waste' are not vague ideals espoused and not possible in the present.
These are what commuities are doing NOW!
As for our 'human' condition: the communities that are reducing,
re-using, and recycling, and adopting Zero Waste principles, are human communities.
The above, and other stuff I posted earlier on this topic are ALL factual and from documented research. An informed position, not a casual, uninformed opinion.
Naysayers dismissal of recycling as something not possible now and for other people to do later is only an opinion and its veracity dependent upon the source.
James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
I hear you Dr. Weatherford and I wasn't trying to mean that those ideas were "vague".
Yes some communities are doing it "now".
I'm over here on Oahu where they are experimenting with one of the richest "communities" (Mililani) on Oahu and it just isn't working right now.
I try my best to be an optimistic. You keep using the term "Communities".
Until our Community can clean up it's act... Not much will happen.
I'm not a nay sayer of recycling.
If it's done correctly it can be done. I just don't think the Big Island is quite ready for it in a large scale means.
-------
Today in History
The Great Mahele (land division) was signed into law, 1848
|
