Wasting the Nation.indd - Groundwork

Chapter 3: The politics of wastewould mix bottom ash with fly ash. The next complete berk was soon revealed tobe running the giant Edmonton incinerator in London. LondonWaste sold off itsash for use in cement blocks, so creating “a chemical booby trap” for builders oranyone else taking a hammer or drill to the wall [2005: 194]. Over 5 million blockswere made before the scam was uncovered and the UK’s Environment Agency wasunable to trace them.The third problem is the cost itself. Large incinerators are capital intensive and inEurope respectable pollution control comes close to doubling the price. A 2,000tonne per day giant built in 1995 in the Netherlands cost US$600 million (aboutR4.5 billion) according to Connett. 39 GAIA [2004] lists new proposals in the globalSouth which come in at a fraction of the price, suggesting that pollution controlis somewhat less respectable. They are nevertheless still very costly with proposalsfor new plants ranging from US$41 million (R307 million) for a 600 t/d plant inChennai, India, to US$315 million (R2.4 billion) for a 1,500 t/d plant in Selangor,Malaysia. Most are built by northern engineering corporations and many arefinanced with international debt.They are also costly to run provided that the pollution control is properly servicedand ash is properly disposed. In the US, customers pay twice as much to dump inan incinerator than in a landfill, irrespective of revenues from electricity generation.In Europe disposal fees are generally supplemented by taxes, creating a subsidy forbig waste generators. Such subsidies are even greater in many Southern countriesaccording to GAIA. North and South, standard contracts include a municipalguarantee to deliver a minimum quantity of waste for 25 to 30 years whether to covercapital debt and running costs or to guarantee the fuel for electricity generation.This indicates the fourth problem: incinerators demand waste in contradiction tothe aims set out in the waste hierarchy. Not only do they demand waste but theydrain local revenues which might otherwise be used for minimisation or recyclinginitiatives. In economists’ parlance, the opportunity cost precludes other options.The Stockton Borough Council in Britain concluded that “we are into wastemaximisation” [quoted in Girling 2005: 203].39 Exhange rate calculated at R7.5 to US$1, the low end of present volatile price fluctuations. Gaia [2003] givesUS$658 and 808 million (R4.9 and 6 bn) for two much smaller incinerators (200 and 400 tonnes) built in Japanin the late 1990s. Girling gives ₤100 million (R1.5 bn) as a ball park figure.- 58 - groundWork - Wasting the Nation