Dear Editor,
I have noted your reports on a proposed incinerator for Georgetown and would like to point out in this internet age it is not rocket science to carry out ‘due diligence.’
Incineration is expensive and inefficient, requiring a high calorific value of waste ‒ that is, you have to have the ‘right sort’ of waste, requiring the population to sort the rubbish at source.
There is a danger of increasing air pollution from plastics and heavy metals (such as batteries) ‒ are we there yet?
A quick internet search would reveal a wealth of information; the World Bank Technical Guide is most revealing (http://www.worldbank.org/urban/solid_wm/erm/ CWG%20folder/Waste%20Incineration.pdf).
I would like to quote a few relevant parts that decision-makers and those mudslinging need to consider:
“The backbone of any waste management system is an efficient collection system and an environmentally sound sanitary landfill.” Have we got that? If not, why not and maybe that should be a first step.
There is the waste disposal/treatment hierarchy: indiscriminate dumping, controlled dumping, landfilling, sanitary landfilling, and mechanical treatment (for example, composting and incineration). Which stage are we at? What do we need to do?
Page 13 of the report is very illuminating as it lists the reason why a plant may fail, and I urge everyone with internet access to look through this document and be informed.
Yours faithfully,
Dionne Fries
