Forget coal, burn garbage...

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Sweden's burning with enthusiasm
Waste-to-energy incineration is clean, efficient and 'absolutely feasible for Toronto,'
disposal executives say​
Sep. 16, 2006. 01:00 AM
CHRISTOPHER HUME
MALMO-Garbage disposal may be a burning question in Toronto; here in Sweden, as in
much of Europe, it's simply a question of burning.
With a population of 500,000, Malmo, Sweden's third-largest city, is typical. As
part-owner of Sysav, a corporation created by 14 district municipalities, Malmo operates
an incineration plant that burns waste and in the process provides district heating and
electricity. Indeed, 40 per cent of Malmo homes are heated by Sysav, which also supplies
40 per cent of local power.
The plant, built in 1974, has been updated and expanded several times to meet growing
demand and stringent European Union emission standards. Thanks to advanced flue-gas
cleaning technology, exhaust is 98 per cent water. It's now so clean the locals didn't make
a peep when the most recent expansion was launched last year. After completion in 2008,
the facility will generate fully 60 per cent of the region's electricity.
"We're constantly trying to improve our environment," says Sysav president Haken
Rylander, who has visited Toronto several times and even prepared a feasibility study on
waste incineration for this city's waterfront redevelopment.
"Yes, it's absolutely feasible for Toronto," Rylander insists. "Not only for the waterfront
but for the whole city. The waterfront is too small to support an advanced waste treatment
facility. You ship most of your waste to a landfill site in Michigan; that's not sustainable.
Toronto has an excellent opportunity to introduce waste incineration as one of a number
of methods."
As Rylander explains, Swedish cities were forced to deal with their waste back in the late
1960s when the national government passed stiff environmental protection laws.
Communities realized they couldn't meet these new demands alone and so banded
together to form 30-odd incineration plants throughout Sweden.
Unlike Canada, Sweden rejects landfill because it is inefficient, dangerous and disgusting.
It is a smaller country, of course, with less land to squander and perhaps that means
greater pressure to deal with the issue rather than try to bury it.
"The politicians here had the guts to say there must be a waste-to-energy plant back in the
early '70s," Rylander says. "That's very important. It wasn't popular at the beginning, but
people have seen that it works.
"When we launched the new plant, there was no serious opposition. Public involvement
is very important; we've had many groups come to see what we do, including some from
Toronto and Canada."
What they encounter is a vast industrial plant on the edge of Malmo. Burnable household
waste is brought by truck (many of them fuelled by biogas or methane) and dumped into
an enormous concrete pit. From there it is mixed and moved into three Dante-esque
furnaces that reach 1,000 degrees Celsius. The heat is used to generate steam that powers
turbines that produce electricity and warm Malmo homes.
But as Rylander makes clear, incineration is one of a number of methods used by Sysav.
Most desirable is recycling. The least attractive, from the European perspective, is landfill.
In between, there's composting as well as incineration.
"Combustible waste is burned," Rylander says. "Organic waste is composted."
Throughout the sprawling Sysav campus there are vast piles of organic waste at various
stages of decomposition. After three years, compost is sold to farmers for fertilizer.
Methane is also taken and used to power Sweden's fast-growing fleet of clean vehicles.
By Canadian standards, the amount of material that ends up in landfill is minuscule.
Much of the slag left over from incineration will be reused to build roads.
"You can never get rid of landfill," Rylander admits. "But you can minimize it. You sell
what you can, you burn what you can't."
There's no disguising the fact that Sysav is in the waste disposal business, but parts of the
site could easily be confused for a wildlife sanctuary; swallows have carved nests in a
row of sand dunes and seabirds swim offshore. When Rylander leaves his office at night,
a small colony of rabbits scatters as he approaches. By the way, that office building was
constructed of recycled materials.
Like Canadians, Swedes initially feared incineration because it conjured up visions of
black toxic exhaust spewing from huge smokestacks. That was three decades ago. It
wasn't true then and is less so now.
"More incineration means cleaner air," says Christian Kallerdahl, communications chief
of Renova, west Sweden's equivalent of Sysav. "We are extremely environmental.
Two-thirds of our plant is devoted to cleaning and recovery."
By way of illustration, Rylander points out that in 1985, when Sweden had 18
incineration plants, they emitted 35 grams of dioxin. Now, with 30 plants, dioxin
emissions in all of Sweden are one gram.
The truth is that the European Union and the Swedish national government have set limits
to emissions that go far beyond anything we know in this country, where even the Kyoto
Accord was found to be too demanding.
Meanwhile, incineration remains a dirty word in Toronto, where mere mention of the
term sets Mayor David Miller's heart aflutter. Instead, we opt to truck it to the U.S., which
is a source of civic shame.
Indeed, we remain in the Dark Ages of waste disposal. The costs - financial and
environmental - of shipping garbage to Michigan are horrendous; in Sweden and much of
Europe, it would also be illegal.
Companies such as Sysav and Renova view waste as a resource. Once pollutants have
been washed away, the energy can be turned into heat and electricity, which in turn also
reduces the need for fossil fuels.
We see it as something best buried and forgotten.
Equally important in the Swedish approach is the need to cut back on waste, especially
packaging. Legislation forces companies such as McDonald's and Burger King, heavy
users of packaging, to organize and pay for recycling.
The incineration debate in Sweden took place in the 1960s and '70s. Though not everyone
agreed with the concept, a decision was made, applied and since then much improved.
During that period, Toronto has made no progress whatsoever. The only thing that's
changed is the amount of waste we produce - it's greater than ever.

http://www.seas.columbia.edu/earth/wtert/sofos/Hume_Sweden's%20burning%20with%20enthusiasm.pdf.