By Karen Aney (The Cascade) – Email
Date Posted: September 21, 2011
Print Edition: September 14, 2011
Waste incinerator – it sounds like a cool superhero name, but it’s really not. The local papers and politicians have been focused on this issue for the past few weeks, though. As of July 25th, the provincial government has approved a plan that may or may not result in a waste incinerator being built somewhere in the Fraser Valley.
First, note the language. Nothing is for sure yet. This is one possible solution to waste reduction, and one possible location to put it in. There’s plenty of time for a collective deep breath and some cool-headed thinking. It seems, though, that all we’re hearing is one-sided whining from pandering politicians.
Liberal MLA Donna Barnett has spoken out publically against the plan, because burning trash will mean the loss of approximately 120 jobs in Cache Creek. Why? Because it will make the landfill stationed there obsolete. Show of hands, everybody – 120 more people who are too proud to work at McDonalds, or a big heaping pile of garbage in one of the most beautiful parts of our province?
No, a waste incinerator is not ideal. Our vivid slice of earth here is already inundated with smog from the ‘big city’. Now, it’s going to be added to with a new, fancy-schmancy place to burn their garbage, too?
But it does have its perks. Burning garbage means less space needed for landfill. Burning garbage also means more energy. It’s killing two birds with one stone – since energy isn’t fiscally reasonably attainable at a low-emission rate, why not obtain it while performing another needed task?
The emissions are the heart of the brewing political storm. Fraser Valley Regional District chairwoman Patricia Ross is staunchly opposed to this plan, saying that she instead favours a change that would place tighter regulations on the packaging we use that isn’t recyclable. That’s all fine and good, honey – but what do we do with the billions of pounds of trash that has already accumulated? Oh, and the billions more that will accumulate whilst the legislature wraps their jowls around this new, costly initiative?
The point I’m arriving at here – admittedly in a roundabout way – is that a waste incinerator is sort of inevitable. Realistically speaking, our region is not going to stop creating waste. As our population booms, in fact, the waste levels are only going to get higher. Why not grab at a silver lining that means more energy? Maybe with all the landfill space we’re saving, we can plant a new forest. Or, y’know, a new subdivision.
