Incinerator may not be bad if plans in place
Incinerator may not be bad if plans in place
Dr. Richard Creagan’s letter in the Dec. 12 issue of West Hawaii Today stated that waste-to-energy incineration is a horrible solution because it causes unintended consequences in cost and harm to the environment, and to our health. His rhetoric leaves room for discussion.
I have not read the WHT article on waste-to-energy incineration, but I assume the planners of the project were not thinking about burning everything that is disposed as trash. That is, only yard clippings and tree trimmings will be burned, while everything else will be recycled. Residents already separate yard clippings and tree trimmings from other trash at the Kealakehe Transfer Station. I assume that this is also accomplished at other transfer stations islandwide.
The harm, if any, from burning only yard clippings, tree trimmings and if available, agricultural grubbing and waste construction lumber, may be further mitigated by scrubbing the soot from the smoke before it is released into the atmosphere. An environmental impact statement or report should address this issue.
The risk of incurring huge financial cost may be avoided by establishing a break-even point, which is the point in time where expenses and income become equal. Ideally, this break-even point should also be the point where the project starts to generate a profit. If it appears that the project will take longer than expected to become profitable, then it may be better off to scrub it completely in order to avoid the risk of turning it into a money pit.
One of the questions to ask is: Will there be enough fuel to sustain the operation of the waste-to-energy incinerator throughout its lifetime?
There may be more related issues, but if the above items are addressed thoroughly, island residents may be in a better position to decide whether waste-to-energy incinerator is the right option or not.
Nestorio Domingo
Kailua-Kona