Why Are We Against the Incinerator?
Public Health Hazards
Burning anything from wood to coal releases particles that enter the air we breathe. While most of the particles found in natural materials are harmless, there are serious health risks associated with burning solid waste. Dioxins, known to cause cancer, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) can be released over huge areas, posing moderate health risks for anyone within a 50-mile radius of a waste incinerator and serious health risks for anyone closer. According to the United Nations Environment Programme, incinerators are the leading source of dioxin into the global environment. Although there have been considerable improvements in the capture and containment of these materials, the fact remains that we'd be burning our trash at the expense of our health. The groundwater and the air will be affected, and so would cows and other animals in our local farms. Our food and milk could become contaminated with the cancer-causing dioxins, which get stored in the animals' fat.
The British Society for Ecological Medicine states:
"… science is continually evolving and research studies are revealing toxicity at progressively lower exposures for many toxic substances. This trend is certain to continue. Secondly there is the historical fact that regulators have consistently and repeatedly underestimated the risk of pollutants and toxic chemicals." (see full PDF)
There are medically proven health hazards — cancer, birth defects, respiratory problems, lymphoma, sarcoma — from living close to one incinerator, but many residents, such as in Adamstown, Buckeystown and Point of Rocks, would be near this now-approved facility AND the Dickerson, Maryland, facility, increasing their health risks.
The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection "estimates that solid waste combustors [incinerators that primarily burn household trash, also referred to as municipal solid waste combustors] are the largest source category [of mercury], emitting slightly more than 6,000 pounds of mercury per year. Incinerators that burn medical and related wastes also appear to be a significant source, although less so than estimated in a previous EPA report on mercury emissions nationwide."
Waste-to-energy incinerators convert 10% to 30% of the waste burned into toxic ash, which the EPA allows to be used as daily landfill cover. Waste-to-energy incinerators do NOT eliminate the need for a landfill. Instead, they create the need for a landfill with potentially hazardous ash as a byproduct of the burning. Read more about the problems with the ash (PDF).
Southern Frederick County has already faced enough pollution and contamination. Groundwater contamination occurred as recently as 2006 from Eastalco (see articles: 1, 2 and 3) and in the late 1980s from Trans-Tech (Skyworks) (PDF) on Adamstown Road. See pollution reports (with information from the U.S. EPA's Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) on Eastalco, Essroc (closed for now) and Dickerson's incinerator. If you search for Frederick county's "Facilities Releasing TRI Chemicals to Land," you find all three of them are in the Adamstown/Buckeystown area! The reports show them rated on the scale toward the "dirtiest/worst facilities in the United States."
Montgomery County residents who live near the Dickerson incinerator have expressed concern over the number of rare cancers in their area and wonder if they could be linked to the incinerator (as of January 2009, a cancer cluster study is being conducted in Poolesville, Maryland, by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention).
Stories about other incinerators:
- East Liverpool, Ohio has seen fires, explosions, and the death of a trucker (from having fallen into his tanker truck carrying lime slurry, a non-hazardous waste material). An EPA employee failed to properly maintain the air pollution monitors and regularly collect the results.
- Columbus, Ohio, where the closing of an incinerator resulted in lower dioxin levels in the air. It previously put out 984 grams of dioxin TEQ per year — more than all of Germany, twice that of the Netherlands, three times as much as Sweden — for all sources. Regardless, the Ohio EPA stated "there are no substantial health risks posed.” Read more...
- Germany: An incinerator owned by a subsidiary of a large energy corporation was once one of the world’s largest municipal solid waste gasification incinerators. It experienced recurring operational problems, preventing it from reaching full operating capacity, rendering it able to dispose of only one-fifth of the total quantity of contracted waste, forcing cities that had contracted with the facility to find new options. Releases of toxic gas were discovered, and operational problems during the years of test operations included an explosion, cracks of the high-temperature chamber’s concrete due to corrosion and heat, and a leaking sediment basin that held cyanide-contaminated wastewater. The walls of the chamber were so battered that pieces had fallen off and could have caused an explosion. By the time the facility owner decided to close it in 2004, it had lost approximately $500 million. Read more in Incinerators in Disguise, 2006 report (PDF).
- Rochester, Massachusetts: There was an unintentional fire at Covanta's SEMASS trash burner in 2007 (PDF). From the report: "Firefighters from six fire departments have scrambled to get it under control. ... The sheriff's office has asked neighbors in Rochester and Plymouth to tape up their doors and windows because the smoke is toxic."
View the plethora of environmental groups opposed to waste incineration. Even The Florida Medical Board passed a resolution in 2008 regarding the health impacts of waste incinerators.
Sources/further reading:
- Campaign Against the Incineration of Refuse
- Khain Sea Waste Export Episode
- Incinerators Trash Community Health Report (PDF)
- Dr. Paul Connett video, press conference on anti-incineration
- Municipal waste incineration: A poor solution for the twenty first century by Dr. Paul Connett
- Competition Between Recycling and Incineration by Jeffrey Morris, PhD
- Incinerators in Disguise, 2006 report (PDF)
- Incinerators: the lethal consequences of breathing fire
- Health effects of exposure to waste incinerator emissions: a review of epidemiological studies (PDF), Annals of Premium Health (translated from Italian title)
- Rachel's Environment & Health News (PDF)
- Negative Impacts of Incineration-based Waste-to-Energy Technology
- Cancer incidence near municipal solid waste incinerators in Great Britain, British Journal of Cancer
- Public health problems around the MIWA waste incinerator in Sint-Niklaas (Belgium)
- www.zerowasteamerica.org
- Incinerator Ash Is Hazardous Waste
- Info on an incinerator in Harrisburg, Pa., that closed
- British Society of Ecological Medicine (PDF)
- The Story of Stuff
- Montgomery County to study possible cancer cluster
- Toxics & Hazards: Mercury in Massachusetts


