Metro Vancouver is taking more heat over its plan to build a second garbage incinerator, with a new study commissioned by waste company Belkorp Environmental Services suggesting the move could cost up to $1.3 billion more than originally estimated.

The analysis, conducted by ICF International on behalf of Belkorp, comes as Metro Vancouver attempts to deal with the province’s rejection of its proposed Bylaw 280, which was integral to its solid waste management plan because it would have ensured garbage generated in Metro was kept in the region.

Belkorp, which runs the Cache Creek dump, has been involved in a high-profile lobbying campaign against Bylaw 280 as well as Metro Vancouver’s plans to burn the region’s waste rather than landfill it. Metro is slated to close the Cache Creek dump in 2016.

“We’re still fighting for options that are better than the incinerator,” said Russ Black, Belkorp’s vice-president of corporate development. “Irrespective of Bylaw 280, we still wanted to show the true costs of the incinerator.”

The report, by ICF’s lead author Seth Hulkower, suggests Metro Vancouver significantly overestimated the revenue it would earn by selling electricity from the new incinerator to BC Hydro over a period of 35 years.

Metro had suggested it would seek to negotiate a price of $100 per kilowatt hour from BC Hydro, but Hulkower noted the waste-to-energy business plan doesn’t take into account that BC Hydro may adjust the price it pays for electricity after Metro recovers it capital outlay on the project.

Metro Vancouver chairman Greg Moore said he’s not surprised with the study’s findings, saying it’s a point that has long been argued by Belkorp.

But he said the analysis is premature considering that Metro has at least 10 proponents offering different forms of waste-to-energy, including district heat and gasification, and there are several potential scenarios.

“They don’t know anything about what we’re doing in our (request-for-proposals) process … all of them are not based on selling to Hydro,” Moore said.

He added Metro has experience running a waste-to-energy plant, having done so in Burnaby since 1988, while Belkorp is interested in setting up multi-material recovery facilities and ensuring the dump continues to operate.

“They are relentless in pursuit of their agenda to continue to have garbage going to their landfill,” Moore said. “Until that decision is made I don’t think they’ll stop.”

Belkorp already has a Coquitlam site where it proposes to build a facility to take a “last pass” at waste to remove recyclables such as organics, paper, plastics and metals, a move that would ultimately rob the region of enough material to fuel another waste-to-energy facility.

Black acknowledged multi-material recovery facilities directly compete with incinerators but say they make sense. “When you look at the range of costs, there’s some serious questions that have to be addressed,” he said.

by: http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Metro+incinerator+would+cost+billion+more+than+planned+study/10329525/story.html

The figure was revealed in the Alice Springs regional waste management facility report for October.

The dead pet you asked the vet to dispose of will end up buried in landfill, in most places across the country, and Alice Springs is no different.

“It’s a combination of horses, dogs, cats, pigs, any animal that dies,” said Alice Springs council technical services director Greg Buxton. “Road kill, kangaroos and that, the rangers pick them up, and you’ve got to dispose of them somewhere hygienic. So we put them at the back of landfill.”

The facility is on track to exceed last year’s total, with 3.7 tonnes deposited in the first quarter of this financial year.

Mr Buxton said most regional councils across the country dispose of dead animals in landfill.

“In the bigger cities they have an incinerator type setting where they cremate them, whereas we don’t have an incinerator here,” he said.

by: http://www.news.com.au/national/northern-territory/central-australias-animal-graveyard/story-fnn3gfdo-1227123002725

Heathrow Airport has announced plans to move an incinerator away from Stanwell and create a 15 mile ‘green ring’ around the town.

The airport said it altered its plans after residents raised concerns over its plans to relocate its incinerator to the Bedfont Road area.

A Labour county councillor however has said it is like moving pieces around a chess board.

Stanwell and Stanwell Moor councillor Robert Evans said: “I welcome very much the changes and that is due to the pressure put on BAA by me and the Labour party.

“But local resident Andrew McLuskey has done all the hard work.

“But in saying that, we are still battling away to stop expansion happening at Heathrow at all.

“There are still serious reservations and I don’t believe an expansion of the airport is right for the area or the whole country.

“We are talking semantics here – it’s a big expansion in a very cramped area. It’s like moving pieces around a chess board – whatever we don’t like around Stanwell will be just as massive somewhere else.”

Changes to the plans include introducing a 15 mile ‘green corridor’ which will increase the amount of recreational space between the town and a new car park south to the airport – which has also been reduced in size.

A new park and an all-weather sports pitch is being mooted for the area, as well as the potential building of ‘balancing ponds’ to help control the release of floodwater.

Roberto Tambini, chief executive of Spelthorne Borough Council, said: “We are delighted that Heathrow has listened to and acted upon our feedback in creating its updated expansion plans and that the residents of Spelthorne have been offered an improved deal as a result.

“I am sure that we can work together and that Heathrow will continue to listen to Spelthorne residents and demonstrate a flexible approach to future proposals.”

Some of the £16 billion of private money being invested will also be used to support the Environment Agency in developing flood prevention schemes to protect homes and property in the surrounding areas.

The airport has also announced plans to fund a new bypass to replace the existing A3044 at Colnbrook and Poyle to ease congestion issues.

John Holland-Kaye, chief executive of Heathrow said: “The expansion of Heathrow can bring significant benefits for local people as well as the UK economy.

“As well as bringing 50,000 new jobs and 10,000 apprenticeships, we can also improve the environmental landscape around the airport and mitigate some of today’s problems including road congestion and flooding. We continue to improve our plans based on the feedback we receive.”

The Airports Commission is currently assessing the case for expansion of either Heathrow or Gatwick.

The first of many public meetings concerning the disposal of more than 15 million pounds of M6 propellant at Camp Minden drew close to 150 concerned citizens and officials to the Minden Civic Center Thursday night.

There, they learned the agreement reached between the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army, which will fund the $28.5 million clean up of the illegally stored material left by Explo Systems, Inc., calls strictly for open air burning.

“Local contractors, the Maddens, designed a device,” Webster Parish Sheriff Gary Sexton, who set up the meeting, said. “For some reason, that device is not being considered in this clean up process.”

“We’re disappointed,” James Madden, owner of Madden Contracting, said. Madden’s son, David spent time and money researching and building a prototype that would’ve allowed closed incineration of the product. “We considered we built a better mousetrap.”

However, Madden may not be out of it yet. The Army must first design a bid package and go through a process required by law to find a company to take on the project.

“The Maddens can throw in a bid on the open tray process,” Sexton said. “They certainly have the right to come in and I think they will do that.”

State Sen. Robert Adley said while discussion concerning responsibility was taking place, the Maddens developed a plan to deal with it. Adley, along with others in the local delegation, attended a demonstration of the incinerator at Camp Minden last January.

“It looked good to us,” Adley said. “We’re not professionals, but under law, by their interpretation, the EPA cannot use that process. I regret that, but it’s where we are at this stage of the game.”

Adley said that under existing law, the Louisiana Military Department and Maj. Gen. Glenn H. Curtis are required to take bids from whoever provides one.

“At the end of the day, he (Curtis) can sit down and decide who’s qualified, who has the experience and if they have the financial backing to do it,” Adley said. “All of those things will be taken into consideration. It would be wonderful if it ended up being someone who, when they finish, will be sitting here breathing this air with us.”

David Madden seemed resigned to the EPA’s decision after attending an informal meeting with officials earlier in the day.

“I’ve studied this process and, yes, I did work for an incinerator,” he said. “I met with EPA officials and other experts not associated with the EPA, and they are going down the right path with the open trays.”

Madden said his change of heart hinged on the haste with which the disposal must take place to avoid more degradation of the product, which makes it more dangerous.

“It is important this get started the first quarter of next year,” he said. “I have looked at the air quality plumes (from open tray burning). Only 10 percent of this fallout will go to Doyline. There’s an equal amount going toward Bossier and going north. Our business is about a mile and a half due east. We’re all going to get some of this.”

District 10 State Rep. Gene Reynolds said, going forward, communication is key.

“On my website and in my office, we will keep all of the completely updated materials,” Reynolds said. “We’re going to keep (the public) informed with everything that comes out from this point forward.”

Sexton stressed the importance of the public’s help.

“Help us calm the fears of the people in the community about what we don’t know is going to happen with the destruction of the M6 propellant,” he said. “We may all speculate on things that may happen, but we don’t need to talk about what we have to worry about. The people who are going to be responsible – whoever the contractor is – the people that are going to be disposing of this product, keep them in your prayers because something could happen to the people who are responsible for going out there and opening those bunkers, picking this product up, moving it and destroying it where we can live in a safer community.”

The next public meeting is tentatively scheduled for Dec. 16. Time and location have not been decided.

by: http://press-herald.com/open-tray-burning-wins-out-over-closed-incinerator-for-m6-propellant-at-camp-minden/

FARGO, N.D. — California health officials have given notice that North Dakota is one of six states that could receive Ebola medical waste in the event the state has any material to incinerate.

In a notice posted last week, the California Department of Public Health listed North Dakota as one of six states where California sends medical waste to be incinerated when onsite disposal is not available at medical centers.

Healthcare Environmental Services Inc., located at an industrial park at 1420 40th St. N. in Fargo, operates a medical waste incinerator that also accepts waste from other locations.

Calls to Healthcare Environmental Services on Tuesday afternoon were not returned.

The company is owned by Sanford Health. A Sanford spokeswoman said it could not immediately comment on the possible incineration of Ebola waste from California at the Fargo facility.

So far, California has no known Ebola cases, according to the state health department, which spelled out its interim guidelines for safe handling of medical waste in an alert to providers and others.

In another development, public health officials are monitoring two North Dakota residents who recently returned from countries in West Africa that are battling the Ebola epidemic.

Neither of the two residents is running a temperature or showing any symptoms of an Ebola infection, which can include diarrhea, joint and muscle aches and abnormal bleeding.

“They’ve just recently traveled to the area,” said epidemiologist Michelle Feist of the North Dakota Health Department. “They pose no risk to the community.”

Health officials are not releasing information about where the two people reside.

Public health officials in Minnesota and South Dakota also are monitoring residents in those states who have recently visited Guinea, Liberia or Sierra Leone in West Africa, where an outbreak of Ebola has killed about 5,000.

State health officials are contacted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention when someone is entering the United States from those countries through five major international airports.

“We are doing monitoring,” said Sam Brungardt, a public information officer for the Minnesota Health Department.

On Monday, Minnesota health officials announced that they were monitoring one resident who had traveled to West Africa, but the list of people to monitor is growing.

“It has grown, and it will continue to grow as we get reports from the CDC,” Brungardt said. “There’s people who are returning from these three West African countries every day.”

So far, none of those being monitored for signs of fever with twice-daily temperature checks show any sign of infection, he said.

As a precaution, however, they will continue to be checked during the 21-day observation period, generally regarded as the incubation period for the Ebola virus.

South Dakota health officials also are monitoring someone who recently returned from West Africa, but is not showing symptoms.

by: http://bismarcktribune.com/news/state-and-regional/n-d-could-receive-ebola-waste-from-calif/article_10e0e242-5f2c-11e4-8ff8-8ba8bab48ce3.html

Patients with this debilitating virus produce 440 gallons of medical waste daily, including instruments, gowns, gloves, body fluids, sheets, mattresses and more. That’s a substantial amount of medical waste in any situation, but it’s especially daunting in this case because it needs to be disposed of extremely cautiously, to avoid the risk of spreading infection. What do you do with a problem like Ebola waste? Because you don’t want to toss it in the garbage.

Somewhat surprisingly, says Bausch, the United States actually faces bigger problems when it comes to safely disposing of Ebola waste, which is simply burned in large pits in Africa: “In the United States, of course, we are somewhat beholden to higher tech solutions, which in some ways are a little bit more problematic in terms of treating all that waste, and we need autoclaves or incinerators that can handle that sort of thing. It’s not the actual inactivation that’s particularly difficult; it’s just the process of getting the waste from, of course, the frontline of care and interaction with the patients safely to the place where it can be incinerated or autoclaved.”

The problem in the United States is ironically compounded by the increased access to medical care, and the higher quality of medical services, available. In the United States, patients are treated by medical teams with access to a huge volume of supplies they use for protection, including masks, gowns, booties, and gloves, along with sanitizers and other tools. Moreover, patients receive extensive medical interventions that generate waste like needles, tubing, medical tape, empty IV bags, and more. The very care that has helped most of the handful of Ebola patients in the United States conquer the disease has contributed to the huge amount of waste generated, highlighting a critical hole in U.S. medical infrastructure — while African hospitals may have lacked the supplies and personnel needed to supply aid to Ebola patients, they’re at least prepared to handle the waste.

The CDC just issued guidelines to help clinicians and administrators decide upon how to handle Ebola waste, but The New York Times notes that many facilities don’t have the autoclave, and incinerator, capacity to handle medical waste on this scale. Some states prohibit the burning of medical waste altogether, or have barred incineration of Ebola waste, leading to the transport of waste across state borders to facilities that can handle it, which poses its own risks; with every mile added to transport, there’s a greater risk of spreading disease to previously unexposed communities.

Surprisingly, defenders of burning the waste come from surprising corners. Environmentals like Allen Hershkowitz, National Resources Defense Council senior scientist, point out that: “There’s no pollutant that’s going to come out of a waste incinerator that’s more dangerous than the Ebola virus. When you’re dealing with pathogenic and biological hazards, sometimes the safest thing to do is combustion.”

The argument in defense of incineration can be bolstered by the fact that medical waste companies specialize in high-efficiency incineration with equipment designed to minimize and trap byproducts of combustion, reducing overall pollution considerably. Fears about Ebola, rather than genuine environmental or public health concerns, are driving the decision to push against incineration of ebola waste in many regions, but eventually, the United States is going to have to face facts: The mounting waste that accumulates in facilities where Ebola patients receive treatments needs to be disposed of safely, and promptly.

by: http://www.care2.com/causes/an-unexpected-ebola-infrastructure-problem-waste.html