Toronto's Trash - Burn It

  • Posted by Staff
  • Filed in City
  • September 28, 2005

untitled.bmp
Today it was revealed by the Toronto Star that the Ministry of the Environment has developed contingency dump sites for Toronto's garbage.

Surprise, Surprise all of the locations are NOT in Toronto. Of course, this is if all else fails and Michigan finally begins to stop letting us ship our garbage there, which I have always found as an unacceptable solution.

I am by no means claiming to be an expert on dumping, incineration, or waste diversion programs. However, I am a firm believer in handling your own responsibilities, and this Toronto has not done. To that end, I propose that we begin utilizing some of the emerging "incinerating" technologies.

Currently there is a incinerator in Peel region. The heat generated from the plant is also a source of electricity. This is what has been in the past called "green incineration." The air pollutants that are emitted are minimal, and are well within the Ministry of the Environment standards. This is all from 1992 technology! More and more incineration is becoming the way to deal current waste disposal issues. Incinerators are commonplace in Europe - many of you that have travelled there would have likely never even noticed.

Toronto should adopt incineration for the following reasons:

1) It is clean.
2) It can be done without odour and can be visibly unnoticeable - ask the residents of Peel.
2) It can be cost-effecitve if it is done through an open bidding process with involvement from business.
3) It can provide energy.
4) It is a way Toronto can deal with its OWN problem.
5) It can be done while the City of Toronto continues to set an aggressive recycling and waste diversion program

Those opposed to incineration argue that everything should be recycled, and if it cannot be recycled, then it should not be made in the first place. I will admit, that this is the IDEAL situation. However it is not the reality. Instead we are currently diverting garbage to a neighbouring country and state without guilt. Even if incineration is just a temporary solution until "everything becomes recyclable" then I would argue that is a better solution then pawning it off to other juridictions.

They installed an incinerator in Peel when it was highly unpopular politically - but today, people do not even notice it is there - It will take alot of political will to ever make incineration a reality - but I think it makes good sense.

Reader Reviews and Comments

Submit a Review or Comment

i don't understand why people are against incineration. it makes sense to me too. and i hear that some of the incineration plants in europe are actually quite attractive buildings.

Posted by: travis at September 28, 2005 1:57 PM

Inceniration is ineffecient!

There is a Toronto based company that turns 100 percent of waste into ELECTRICTY.

SUBOR

The plant will pay for itself in four years. And provide a source of positive income.

I suggest you read about it before suggesting burnign the trash.

How can burning something not polute the air? "No matter is created or destroyed" Where do the toxins go?

Posted by: Ray Suelzer at September 30, 2005 12:14 PM

Toronto is too democratic to have its own garbage. Everyone cries NIMBY and the councillors listen. I like the fact that the local gov't works. :)

BTW: The last time I had the time to watch city council debate garbage the following three issues were brought up by some councillor (Pam? Olivia? Sylvia? I forget).

  • Paper recycling is actually one of the only recyclables which turn a profit. So much of TO's waste stream is non paper based.. which generally doesn't burn well (or as cleanly) as dead trees. This brings up the _FACT_, the councillor stated, that if TO were to start burning its garbage it would have to IMPORT garbage from neighbouring jurisdictions just to be able to "maintain a flame".
  • "clean" is an elastic measuring device. People who claim burning garbage is "clean" define clean as emitting S0_2, NO, gross particulate matter etc. But rarely does "clean" defined strictly as "breathable with no ill effects". It rarely include fine particulate matter, DIOXINS and CO_2. BTW: Burning plastics = dioxins = :(.



  • The incidence of asthma in the ash bridges bay area has dropped precipitously after garbage incineration there was halted. "clean" is spin. Burning is never "clean".




As a final note.. I remember when TO had brown smog (It was also when Lakeview was operational). Now compare smog days in TO with temperature. You'll notice when warm air is coming from the South West (NANTICOKE!) the air here is crap, the CN tower is barely visible. But on days when cool air is coming from the West or North West you can actually see the sky. Nanticoke must go. Air is to vital to life to continually dump crap into it just to make a quick buck.



PS: If you look to Peel for ways to run a city then you haven't quite grasped the essential difference between Peel and TO.

Posted by: Air Breather at September 30, 2005 8:36 PM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

Email This Entry

Email 'Toronto's Trash - Burn It' to: Message (optional):
Your email address:

Please type the verification code displayed in the image:

By forwarding this entry to a friend, we do not opt you or your friend into
receiving any additional mailings from blogTO. We hate spam too.
Disclaimer: Comments and blog entries represent the viewpoints of the individual and no one else.