More burning questions loom on Metro garbage -Aug 5, 2011 BC Local News

Climate scientist defends incinerators -Aug 3, 2011 North Shore News

Don’t burn precious tax dollars -Aug 3, 2011 Delta Optimist

B.C. government eyes a solid waste alternative to incinerators -Aug 2, 2011 Vancouver Sun

Scientists back Metro Vancouver incinerator plan -July 26, 2011 CBC News

Prevent Cancer Now Warns BC Residents About the Health Risks of Incineration -July 27, 2011 PCN

Gold River’s bid to burn garbage from Metro Vancouver smoulders -July 27, 2011 Times Colonist

BC MOE -Metro Vancouver Solid Waste Management Plan Approved -July 25, 2011 News Release

Metro Vancouver’s proposed incinerator might have a nanopollution problem – July 21, 2011 Georgia Straight

Chilliwack Politicos Angry Metro’s Proposed Incinerator on Major Project Inventory -Dec 6, 2010 Chilliwack Times

Ministry of Finance Press Release Dec 3 -this is of note as it lists Metro’s proposed incinerator. This is surprising as it notes it under the category of CLEAN technology and it appears to assume it will be approved by the Minister of Environment.

Province slips in a backdoor for mixed municipal solid waste -since this was not included in the Clean Energy Act, a very short regulation was added in October to add biogenic waste to the definition of what is Clean or Renewable. There is no restriction to source separated waste.

Vancouver Joins International Day of Action on Waste Incineration- Dec 1, 2010 Wilderness Committee

FVRD calls on Fraser Baser Council for AQ Support- Oct 27, 2010 Chilliwack Progress

New Cabinet: Penner Shuffled Out of Incinerator Decision -Oct 25, 2010 Abby News

Murray Coell Now BC’s Environment Minister -Oct 25, 2010 RCBC

Shutdown of World’s Largest Incinerator Signals a Change in the Climate -Oct 21, 2010 GAIA

Landfill Lobby Trashed Waste to Energy Plan -Sept 22, 2010 The Tyee

Green Bins Hit Nanaimo -Sept 15, 2010 Westcoaster

A Zero Waste Business is a Shining Star -Sept 10, 2010 Mayor Greg Moore’s Blog

Kwantlen Students Ask Minister Penner and Surrey Mayor Watts to Promise No New Garbage Incinerator -Sep 8, 2010 Wilderness Committee

San Francisco Announces 77% Recycling -Sep 1, 2010 California Chronicle. While not in BC and while every jurisdiction counts waste differently, it is important to note that setting an ambitious target and working towards it results in progress towards the goal (a 5% increase over last year and surpassing their own target).

Metro Vancouver Proposal to Burn Trash Hangs on Review of Weighty Document -Sept 2, 2010 Vancouver Sun

Mayors Back Waste Incineration Plan -Aug 27, 2010 North Shore News

Metro Waste-burning  Plan Heads to Victoria -Aug 27, 2010 Burnaby News Leader

PoCo Keeps More Trash Out of System -Aug 26, 2010 TriCity News

Groups Warn “Toxic Ash” Coming to Local Landfill -Aug 21, 2010 Delta Optimist

Attorney General Sues Wallingford Power Plant for Emissions Violations -Aug 18, 2010 My Record Journal Note: while this takes place in Connecticut, Covanta is the same company that operates the Burnaby Incinerator and is proposing to run one in Gold River.

Environmentalists Urge Minister Penner to Reject Incineration Plan Due to Toxic Ash in Burns Bog Landfill -Aug 16, 2010 Wilderness Committee

Ministry of Environment  Response to “Biased” Report Must Be Considered -Aug 13, 2010 The Tyee

Trash or Burn? -Aug 12, 2010 Macleans

Metro Must Reexamine Biased  Incinerator Report -August 12, 2010 Wilderness Committee

Metro Vote Disrepects  Fraser Valley-Aug 6, 2010 Chilliwack Progress

Garbage Will Burn But Where? -Aug 4, 2010 Burnaby Now

One Tough Decision for Penner -Aug 3, 2010 Chilliwack Times

Metro Vancouver to look at burning region’s garbage — though maybe not locally -Aug 1, 2010 Vancouver Sun

Don’t Burn It; Don’t Bury It: Vancouver Seeks Novel Ways of Dealing With Trash -Aug 1, 2010 Globe and Mail

Pollution an Urban Myth -Aug 1, 2010 The Province Note: this opinion piece on behalf of the plastics industry fails to realize it is based on some of its own myths. The Burnaby incinerator cannot claim to be low in dioxin and furan emissions because the data does not exist. The previous and proposed solid waste plans specifically exclude testing from happening during start-up, shut down and malfunction which are the times when the levels would be the highest. This conveniently allows the incinerator to claim that no tests were over allowable limits. Add the facts that the tests are done at times known to the operators and that an incinerator inspector noted that the staff would stockpile materials to ensure the temperature stayed high enough and it would be highly surprising if any testing were done at a time when the limits would be exceeded. What is needed is independent third party testing done continuously with the results posted publicly and the cumulative emissions reported. In addition, there is no logic in saying that because pollution already exists in an area, that each addition to it is not worth preventing.

They’re Back to Square One -July 31, 2010 Vancouver Sun

Incinerator Still a Possibility for Metro Vancouver -July 30, 2010 CTV News

Metro Vancouver Considers Waste Incinerator -July 30, 2010 CBC

Metro Board Moves Ahead with Garbage Burning Scheme -July 30, 2010 The Tyee

Metro Vancouver Votes on Plan to Burn Garbage – July 30, 2010 Burnaby Now

Incinerator Still in Metro’s Waste Plan -July 30, 2010 Abbotsford Times

It’s SE2 All Over Again: Ross -July 30, 2010 Abbotsford News

Metro Van Votes In Favour of Incineration -July 30, 2010 Chilliwack Progress

New Waste to Energy Incinerator in Metro Vancouver Still Possible After Board Vote -July 30, 2010 Georgia Straight

Metro’s Decision to Incinerate Panned by Fraser Valley Regional District -July 30, 2010 Chilliwack Times

The Future of Metro’s Garbage -Gregor Robertson -July 30, 2010 The Province

A Green Vancouver is So Much Garbage -July 30 Vancouver Sun Note: too bad Pete McMartin missed the point that the City of Vancouver was one of the few actually pushing to decrease waste generated in the first place and so actually far less hypocritical than the municipalities that talk of zero waste and sustainability but voted for the incinerator plan.

Wilderness Committee Will Fight Incinerators Regardless of Metro Vote -July 30 Wilderness Committee

Cancer Prevention Group Urges Metro Vancouver Board to Reject Incineration -July 30 Georgia Straight

It’s Going to Be Close -July 30, 2010 Vancouver Sun

Reasons Not to Rush Into A New Solid Waste Management Plan -July 29, 2010 Vancouver Sun

Gold River Using You Tube To Win Our Garbage -July 29, 2010 Surrey North Delta Leader Notable quote: “an estimated host fee of $ 1 billion over 30 years” -that should raise alarm bells for anyone thinking this is a great, green project

Friday Vote on Garbage Incineration Will Affect Metro Vancouver For Decades -July 28, 2010 The Province

Metro Vancouver Waste to Energy Could Have an Impact on Nearby Property Values -July 28, 2010 Georgia Straight

Mayor Short Changing Deltans on Vancouver Landfill Question- July 28, 2010 Delta Optimist

Waste Plan Showdown Looming -July 28, 2010 Delta Optimist

Metro Must Reexamine Biased Incinerator Support -July 27, 2010 Wilderness Committee

Metro Vancouver Ambition to Burn Garbage Gives Off Suspicious Smell -July 23, 2010 The Province

CRD Reviews Waste To Energy Options-July 22, 2010 100 Mile House Free Press

Metro Vancouver’s Trash Lures Tycoons -July 22, 2010 Georgia Straight

Tide Shifting Away From Waste Incineration -July 22, 2010 Wilderness Committee

New Waste Incinerator for Metro Vancouver Gets Support-July 22, 2010 CBC News

Metro Pushes Ahead With Garbage Incinerator Plan -July 22, 2010 Vancouver Sun

Metro Vancouver Would Be Crazy to Burn More Trash -July 21, 2010 Georgia Straight

Committee Recommends Trash Incineration for Metro Vancouver -July 21, Vancouver Sun

Metro Committee Recommends Incineration -July 21, 2010 Burnaby News Leader

Metro Van Committee Recommends Garbage Incineration-July 21 The Province

Companies to Pitch Incinerator Plan for Gold River -July 21, 2010 Vancouver Sun

CUPE BC Urges Metro Vancouver to Adopt More Recycling, Waste Reduction -July 16 CUPE

Utility Taxes in Metro Vancouver to Increase 54% by 2015 -July 19, 2010 The Province

Unions Pitch for Island Burner at Final Waste Hearing -July 15, 2010 Bowen Island Undercurrent

PoCo Ups Waste-Diversion Ante -July 13, 2010 Coquitlam Now

MR Council Sets Fire to Region’s  Proposal -July 13, 2010

Cities Split on Burning Garbage -July 12, 2010 BC Local News

Public Meeting About Waste Management Plan to Be Held Next Week -July 10, 2010 News 1130

Vancouver and District Labour Council Position

Some Mayors Remain Non-committal on Waste-to-energy Incineration in Metro Vancouver -July 8, 2010 Georgia Straight

Metro Vancouver Waste-to-Energy Opponents Fired Up for a Fight -July 8, 2010 Georgia Straight

Idol Singer in Tune with Zero Waste -July 7, 2010 The Province

Chambers Urge Metro to Take Time on Burner Decision -July 6, 2010 Abbotsford Times

Trash Incinerator Finds Burning Opposition- July 6, 2010 Vancouver Sun

Vancouver to Waste Management Officials: No Incinerator, Please -July 5, 2010 Vancouver Sun

Vancouver Board of Trade Letter to Metro -Concerned over Incinerators July 5, 2010

Recycle More, Waste Less -UBC Students Urge -July 2, 2010 Vancouver Sun

Letter from Mayor of Chilliwack -July 2, 2010

Garbage Argument: Burn, Bury, or Recycle? -July 1, 2010 Munisha Tumato Vancouver Observer

BC Activist Travels to Detroit to Help Fight World’s Largest Waste Incinerator -June 25, 2010

FVRD Votes on Metro Vancouver Solid Waste Plan -June 23, 2010

Wilderness Committee Goes On Attack Against Incinerators -June 22, 2010 24 Hours

Metro Vancouver’s Trash Incineration Plans Mocked in Environmental Group’s Video -June 22, 2010 Vancouver Sun

UBC Study Suggest Waste Reduction as Best Option -June 22, 2010 Vancouver Sun

Won’t Let Em Put a Landfill in the Sky -June 21, 2010 Chilliwack Progress

Metro Van Garbage Plan Trashed -June 17, 2010 Chilliwack Progress

Les Adds His Voice to Incineration Opposition -June 14, 2010 Chilliwack Progress

Decision Time -June 4, 2010 Chilliwack Progress

Joyce Nelson’s three part series on incineration -Watershed Sentinel (good overall information)

Waste to Energy Doesn’t Deal with the Root Problem -June 2, 2010 Coquitlam Now

There are No Magic Machines for Garbage -May 29, 2010 Vancouver Sun (note: even were magic machines available, they would only treat one symptom of the problem of how we use resources and not the cause, thus the other symptoms such as air pollution, resource depletion, soil loss, habitat and species loss, water contamination, etc. would still continue or worsen)

Abby Singers Fight Garbage Burner- May 28, 2010 Abbotsford Times

Idol, Wife Pen Tune About Air Pollution -May 28, 2010 Metro News

Trash Mountain -May 28, 2010 BC Local News

Trash Talk: Can We Do Better? May 26, 2010 CTV News -MiJung Lee’s four part series (other parts available from this link)

Exhaust Fumes Stall Plasco Project -May 25, 2010 Ottawa Citizen

The Hope Inside Canada’s Garbage Cans -May 24, 2010 The Huffington Post

Zero waste: Fantasy or the future? May 21, 2010. Jeff Nagel, BC Local News

‘Scandalously stupid’ to put incinerator in city  -May 21, 2010 Chilliwack Times

Still Steaming over Burn Issue -May 18, 2010 Abbotsford Times

MLA Casts Doubt on Metro Vancouver’s Solid Waste Plan -May 17, 2010 Abbotsford News

Vocal Crowd Opposes Waste Plan -May 15, 2010 Abbotsford News

The Stealth Incinerators –  May 14, 2010. Jeff Nagel, BC Local News

Plan Calls for Incineration, Recycling- May 14, 2010 North Shore News (Note: Hopefully the part from Roger Quan is a misquote as the fact that there already air pollution already exists is no justification to add to it and it is unclear if the technology exists yet that will accurately measure nanoparticles. If such technology and studies exist, they should be posted on the Metro Vancouver website as it would be ground-breaking news).

Air Quality Important Factor in Decisions:92% -May 13, 2010 Abbotsford News

Is Burying Best? -May 7, 2010. Jeff Nagel, BC Local News

American firm wants to build trash incinerator for Vancouver on the Island -May 5,  2010 Times Columnist

Let’s trash region’s plan to incinerate garbage -May 4, 2010 Province

Public wary of WTE plans- May 4, 2010 Hope Standard

Burning questions -April 30, 2010 Abbotsford News

Metro halts grant for scientist who opposed incineration – April 27, 2010 Abbotsford News

Don’t underestimate trash impact -April 22, 2010 Tri-City News

Give public ‘balanced’ trash plan process- April 16, 2010 Abbotsford News

Metro votes to take trash plan public -April 9, 2010 BC Local News

Burning questions are cause for a big stink in the Valley- April 4, 2010 Province

Metro Vancouver’s garbage incineration plan under fire -April 1, 2010 Georgia Straight

ACC pulls plug on plant -March 19, 2010 Kamloops News

Trash Incinerator may go to Tsawwassen- December 9, 2009 Cloverdale Reporter

Metro aims to build new incinerator to burn more garbage December 1, 2009 Cloverdale Reporter

Pro-incinerator expert testified for tobacco companies -October 5, 2009 Vancouver Sun

Survey finds 93% believe Metro Vancouver’s Zero Waste goal falls short -Sept 14, 2009 Daily Commercial News

Blair Lekstrom, then Minister of Energy, Mining and Petroleum Resources, whose ministry defines what is Clean and Renewable Energy and thus which projects can qualify for the subsidies, noted in a letter that:

Under the Definitions, eligible biomass power can include electricity generated from the combustion or gasification of clean wood, dedicated energy crops, agricultural fibre, and clean organic material separated from municipal solid waste (MSW).  Organic material treated with inorganic substances or inorganic MSW is not eligible.

The Clean Energy Act does not expand the definition of biomass to include MSW fired electricity.  The definition of a clean or renewable resource under the Clean Energy Act currently includes biomass, biogas geothermal heat, hydro, solar, ocean wind or any other prescribed resource.  Further details of these definitions can be introduced under regulations if the Clean Energy Act becomes law.

That was good news as it would have ensured that no subsidies would go to incineration of municipal solid waste under BC Hydro’s recent RFP for biomass power.

In September 2010,  a ministry correspondent said that the new definition was what is in the Clean Energy Act  which is one line (“clean or renewable resource means biomass, biogas, geothermal heat, hydro, solar, ocean, wind or any other prescribed resource”). This was reduced from the initial three page definition that BC Hydro is still using for its power calls.

However, in October 2010, the Clean or Renewable Resource Regulation was added, whose sole purpose seemed to have been adding biogenic waste, the portion of municipal solid waste that is organic in origin, even if it is not separated from the rest of the municipal solid waste.  And it avoided any discussion of it in the Legislature.

Anyone concerned should write to present Minister Rich Coleman at Energy.minister@gov.bc.ca.

At the July 21, 2010 Waste Management Committee Meeting, the Committee approved the Solid Waste plan to go to the Board. Notable exceptions (and kudos to them) were Vancouver Councilor Heather Deal, Surrey Councilor Linda Hepner, Richmond Councilor Harold Steves, Port Moody Mayor Joe Trasolini and Port Coquitlam Mayor Greg Moore who voted against the proposal to build a new incinerator ‘in-region’ and not toe the party line. Too bad they couldn’t have stopped the plan’s progress (for all new incineration) right there. Big thumbs down to Burnaby Mayor Corrigan (who tried to get Zero Waste out of the plan), Pamela Goldsmith Jones, Wayne Wright, Darrell Mussatto (who claimed to be against incineration in a Zero Waste Vancouver poll during the last municipal election), Mary Wade Anderson, Don MacLean & Scott Hamilton -did they even do any of their own research or hear or read any submissions from the public?

But to whom are the others listening? Apparently Johnny Carline (Metro CEO) had already made up his mind and no pesky public input was going to stop it. His presentation gave little credence to people who did not want to finance and breathe fumes from a new incinerator.

It turns out most Metro directors are also not reading. Many claimed that the science supported incineration when in fact the opposite is true. Most research (that is not funded by incineration companies or conducted by researchers with a vested interest in supporting incineration) either points to serious concerns about the health and environmental impacts or highlights the fact that there has not been enough research done to conclude that it is safe. In those cases, the precautionary principle should prevail. Sadly, the only information provided the directors was from Metro’s staff which was heavily biased towards incineration.

The Fraser Valley Regional District

The Fraser Valley Real Estate Board

CUPE BC

Vancouver Board of Trade

Surrey Board of Trade

Vancouver & District Labour Council

Surfrider Foundation

Recycling Council of BC

Ridge Meadows Recycling Society

The Mayor of Chilliwack

Canadian Clean Air Alliance

Go Green Delta

Global Anti-Incinerator Alliance

Metro Vancouver Solid Waste Reference Panel (some thanks for their hard work)

the following local councils: Coquitlam, Lion’s Bay, Maple Ridge, District of North Vancouver, Port Moody and Vancouver

and last but not least, the 65% of people who took the time to fill out a form at the public meetings or submit their comments on line stating their opposition to new incineration since April 2010. That is a 4:1 ratio to the 15.6% who wanted to burn the waste and that included 7 sales pitches from the incineration industry and 8 submissions from Gold River. Also of note for anyone who spoke at the public meetings is that their comments were not included in the consultation information on Metro’s website.

For a good read, check out the comments on Metro’s site. It is likely more than some of the elected officials did.

If they had, they would have been surprised by the 34% who said that Metro could do much more and they submitted their ideas to help. This was the most common theme after concern over pollution and health and environmental concerns followed closely after that. Even some people who supported incineration did so because of environmental concerns around landfills and trucking waste so Zero Waste would resolve that too.

The most alarming comments came from former incinerator inspectors, one in Texas and one in BC who detailed their concerns based on their past experience with “state-of-the art” incinerators. The most heartbreaking were the ones from people that had health problems relating to air quality  -”I write as an absolutely passionate father trying to speak for the life of his daughter, are you listening?”

Apparently not.

Item 1: Waste declined in 2008 and in fact has been declining per capita since 1994. In 2008, it also decreased in the total amount forcing Metro staff to ask for a tipping fee increase. Metro’s financial projections (page 29) for 2011 that “It is expected that the real decline in waste flows, after taking into account regional growth of 1.5 percent, will be approximately 5 percent.”

Why this is a problem for Metro: It diminishes their argument that waste grows annually and that there is a sudden boom in waste. (The boom is in waste-to-energy proposals).

Item 2: Metro belongs to the lobby group Canadian Energy-From-Waste Coalition, which is funded by North America’s largest incinerator companies, and is registered to lobby to push for an incinerator in Durham, Ontario.

Why this is a problem for Metro: It is never good if your local government seems to be working harder for an industry group than it does its own people. This does not seem the action of an unbiased, objective party.

Item 3: Public consultation was poorly done.

While many citizens commented on feeling that Metro’s public presentations were more like sales pitches for incineration and they did not feel the process was fair, even more concerning is the fact that their input was not given to the Waste Management Committee before they voted to move forward with the plan. Despite not providing this information to committee members as it was still in draft form, a staff report recommending proceeding with the plan was presented by Johnny Carline, Metro’s CEO. This appears that Metro staff knew what they were going to recommend before consultation happened.  This was not the only indication that Metro staff had made up their minds some time ago. Metro staff and Marvin Hunt were scheduled to give a presentation in Toronto making it sound like a done deal back in November 2009 but they pulled out once other politicians were made aware of it.

A tally of the written feedback available on Metro’s website shows that of the 377 submissions, 65% of were clearly against building new incinerators with only 15.6% for incinerators.

Item 4: Incinerator ash is not safe and easy to handle.

Why this is a problem for Metro: Metro’s plan relies on cheap and easy disposal of ash ironically in a landfill. Turns out that since the fly ash from the Burnaby Incinerator started going to Cache Creek, the leachate test are showing increased concentrations of materials from the fly ash. The Cache Creek annual report states that they now plan to monofill the flyash material (which has been identified as a source of chloride). After all, this was not the first time Metro had experienced problems hiding its ash (ask what happened at the Coquitlam Landfill) nor is it uncommon. Despite Mayor Lois Jackson’s fervent support for new incineration, Delta residents should be hoping none of the ensuing ash will go to the Vancouver Landfill but Greg Moore was cited as saying that the landfill will take some ash. This shows why much more work is needed to reduce waste and thus reliance on incineration and landfills.

Item 5: Even the Ministry of the Environment (page 23) felt that the AECOM report was biased towards waste to energy.

Why this is a problem for Metro? While it has long been noted that AECOM as an incinerator operator was not impartial, having the approving body for solid waste management plans question the validity of the report makes it less likely that the plan would be approved.