9 Jun 2007

Durham/York Residual Waste Study - PUBLIC NOTICE

Energy-from-waste project update and
Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Study:
Public Information Sessions

The Regions of Durham and York are participating in a joint study to find a better way to manage the residual waste (garbage) remaining after maximizing recycling and composting programs. Since 2004, the two municipalities have been addressing the social, environmental and financial impacts of resolving this issue by way of an “Individual” Environmental Assessment (EA) under the Provincial EA Act. A Joint Waste Management Group comprised of residents, local politicians and Regional staff oversees the project and the general public is involved through the public information session process.

A short-list of sites has been identified and consideration of the final site is underway using a series of evaluation criteria developed through the EA public consultation process. Four sites in Clarington have been identified as potential sites.

An important component of the EA study is to investigate the potential impact to human and ecological health from an energy-from-waste (EFW) facility. The Regions initiated a health and ecological risk assessment study in 2006 and the results will be presented at the public information sessions as shown below.

On June 18, the Region of Durham will be hosting a drop-in style information session on the EFW project. Sessions on June 20, 27 and 28 will update residents on the EFW project as well as results of the health and environmental risk study. Additional information sessions are also planned in York Region. Visit the study website for information on all public information sessions.

An informal drop-in information session
will be held from 2 to 7 p.m.

Monday, June 18
Faith United Church
1778 Nash Road
Courtice

All other information sessions will be held from 6:30 to 9:30 p.m.
Formal presentations begin at 7:00 p.m. at the locations shown below


Wednesday, June 20
Clarington Beech Centre
26 Beech Avenue
Bowmanville

Wednesday, June 27
Faith United Church
1778 Nash Road
Courtice

Thursday, June 28
Newcastle Hall
20 King Street West
Newcastle

To review the EA study documentation, please:
· Visit your local municipal office or library.
· Visit the study web site at http://www.durhamyorkwaste.ca/.
· Call 1-866-398-4423.


*********************************


It's good that we should finally get "results of the health and environmental risk study". Many people will be judging the thoroughness and quality of that information, especially due to the fact that so many don't seem to have much confidence in the objectivity or completeness of information presented to residents OR to municipal politicians to date.

The Regions of Durham and York are participating in a joint study to find a better way to manage the residual waste (garbage) remaining after maximizing recycling and composting programs.

We don't feel that continued effort or maximizing effort toward reducing the waste stream is a priority for Durham Region. What is our present diversion rate? The numbers vary, depending on who you ask and when you ask the question, but we have been told by the Region that it is as high as 55% or as low as 44%. At any rate, they seem to be saying that we won't ever get much beyond where we are now. Well, that is certainly true if they don't concentrate heavily on it - on educating the public, on making more services available (such as removal of batteries, electronic equipment and other hazardous household waste from the garbage stream). They will need to 'feed' the incinerator, and are even discussing shipping IN waste from neighbouring regions such as Peterborough, Northumberland, etc. Is this a "made in Durham" solution? On a "put or pay" system, if either of the municipalities does not provide enough garbage to keep the incinerator burning efficiently, they must pay (in taxpayer's dollars).

Toronto's goal for 2010 is 70% waste diversion. Other cities have an even more aggressive target. The city of Markham is already at a 70% diversion rate after only a little over 2 years of aggressive education and public participation, and are aiming for 75% by next year. They have plans to continuously increase diversion and to get to as close to 100% diversion as they can by 2010. Check out Halifax, Seattle, and other communities in California, New Zealand, and now India to see the growing trend toward the "zero-waste approach".

Yes there is garbage. Yes we need to get rid of it. But we also need to concentrate on producing less of it and smarter ways of dealing with what is left that can't be reduced, reused, recycled or re-invented.

If we continue down the path toward incineration, it is another "out of sight, out of mind" scenario. Landfill will still be needed for the ash produced by incinerating the garbage. And the amount of toxins being released into our already polluted air will increase significantly. Greenhouse gasses and climate change should be a concern, and even more of a concern is the health of residents not only close to the incinerator, but also those farther away since those airborne pollutants, the toxins and chemicals, are spread far and wide.

It is imperative that our politicians take a step back, stop forcing this project through in an accelerated time frame, and go back to seriously consider Alternatives To their present choice of "thermal technology". The time to do that is NOW.

We hope to see a lot of residents at these upcoming Public Information Sessions, especially from Clarington but also from all over Durham Region and from York Region too. We hope residents will ask a LOT of questions and not be satisfied with partial answers, round-about answers, innuendo rather than cold, hard facts.

Stay tuned.

4 comments:

  1. I will be going to the public meetings, but will be skeptical of the health and environmental risk study results. My question is, how can they do a valid study when they don't know which technology will be used yet, don't know where it will be sited yet, don't know exactly what will be burned in it yet... so what kind of study did they do?

    ReplyDelete
  2. They lost all credibility for me when they told us repeatedly that there were no emissions from the stack and it was just a puff of white water vapour. They finally changed their story when pushed (hard), and said there would be emissions but they would be at "safe levels". They call it clean incineration (no such thing) and they say it will let us stop using landfills. That's also untrue. Our garbage ash will have to be shipped to a landfill too, unless they keep it there and build a new landfill in Courtice to take care of the left-over ash, like Ms. McKeever suggests.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Among a host of concerns about the truth of what we'll be fed as it relates to health and environmental issues at the next round of info sessions (I have simply lost faith in the consultants and have no expectations about honesty from our political 'leaders') what should we expect as well from a trip to Europe for these same people to look at incinerators there?

    In Europe, they burn a different stream of waste materials than what we propose to do! What should we expect but BS by talking to the operators of these incinerators?

    What can be learned from looking - you can't see carcinogens!

    Keep in mind, that the people arranging the tour are a subsidiary company of the consulting company Durham and York have hired to sell us this plan to start with - how can we be expected to trust anything they would say?

    This entire (costly) exercise of the European tour is a bad joke at our expense.

    If you attend the info sessions on health and environmental matters, please don't be so naive as to go expecting to get the truth. This consulting outfit is simply trying to earn the 5M they were paid to fleece the public and a few novice politicians.

    ReplyDelete