Zero Waste 2020 versus Incineration - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Zero Waste 2020 versus Incineration PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: edc65-NjExZ



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Zero Waste 2020 versus Incineration

Description:

Testing three times a year, means 54 hours of IDEAL data is being used to ... In 8 out of 9 studies increased death rates from cancer were observed. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:339
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 169
Provided by: GAIA1
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Zero Waste 2020 versus Incineration


1
Zero Waste 2020versusIncineration
  • Dr Paul Connett
  • Professor of Chemistry
  • St Lawrence University, Canton, NY
  • Trani, Italy, June 9, 2005
  • Paul _at_ fluorideALERT.org
  • www.no-burn.org

2
A special thanks
  • To Rossano Ercolini of the group Ambiente Futuro
    for organizing my tour of Italy -and many
    previous tours
  • http//ambientefuturo.interfree.it

3
Part 1
  • The alternatives to incineration
  • The Zero Waste 2020 Strategy

4
Even if you made incineration safe you would
never make it sensible. It simply does not make
sense to spend so much money destroying
resources we should be sharing with the future.
5
INCINERATION IS NOT SUSTAINABLE
6
UNFORTUNATELYMANYPOWERFUL PEOPLEARE NOT
INTERESTEDINSUSTAINABILITY
7
Their view of the world lookssomething like this
8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
  • We are living on this planet as if we had another
    one to go to
  • We cannot run a throwaway society on a finite
    planet
  • Landfills BURY the evidence
  • Incinerators BURN the evidence of unsustainable
    practices
  • We need to face the real problem

11
Our task is not to dispose of waste but to stop
making it
12
Waste is not a disposal problemit is an
industrial designproblem
13
MOVING TOWARDS THE FRONT END -we need to design
waste out of the manufacturing system
NO TO INCINERATION
NO TO LANDFILL
14
To achieve Zero Waste
  • We need three things
  • INDUSTRIAL RESPONSIBILITY (at front end)
  • COMMUNITY RESPONSIBILITY (at back end)
  • 3) GOOD POLITICAL LEADERSHIP to link these two
    together

15
INDUSTRIAL RESPONSIBILITY
1) Better industrial design 2) Extended
Producer Responsibility 3) Clean up
manufacturing process
16
INDUSTRIAL RESPONSIBILITY IN ACTION
  • 1) THE BEER INDUSTRY, ONTARIO, CANADA
  • Uses refillable glass bottles
  • 98 recovered
  • on average each bottle reused 18 times
  • Refillable glass bottles 11 cents cheaper per
    serving than disposable bottles.
  • 2000 jobs in collection and cleaning
  • No cost to municipality
  • Packaging costs internalized

17
INDUSTRIAL RESPONSIBILITY IN ACTION
  • 2) XEROX CORPORATION EUROPE
  • Recovering old copying machines from 16 countries
  • Over 95 of materials reused or recycled!
  • 76 million saved in 2000 !!

18
COMMUNITY RESPONSIBILITY
  • Begins with separation compostables, recyclables
    and residuals (bad industrial design)
  • Drop off of household toxics
  • Reuse and Repair Centers (and retraining)
  • Deconstruction versus demolition
  • Composting facilities (backyard, community and
    centralized).

19
1. COMPOSTABLES
2. RECYCLABLES
3. RESIDUALS
LOCAL USE ?
Pay by bag
3.RESIDUAL SCREENING RESEARCH FACILITY
1. COMPOSTING FACILITY
2. MATERIALS RECOVERY FACILITY
RE-MANUFACTURING
20
The Fantastic 3
21
San Francisco
  • Population 850,000
  • Little space
  • Education has to be done in three languages
  • Over 50 diversion reached by 2000
  • 63 diversion reached by 2004
  • 75 diversion by 2010 (goal)
  • 100 diversion by 2020 i.e. Zero Waste

22
ALL FOOD SCRAPS, YARD TRIMMINGS AND COMPOSTABLE
PAPER GO IN THE GREEN CART
23
ALL BOTTLES, CANS AND RECYCLABLE PAPER GO IN THE
BLUE CART
24
WHAT CANT BE RECYCLED OR COMPOSTED GOES IN THE
BLACK CART
25
BUS SHELTER AD
26
DEDICATED COMPACTING SIDE-LOADERS FOR COMPOSTABLES
27
Compost Facility
28
RICH COMPOST READY FOR MARKET
29
ORGANIC PRODUCE RETURNS TO SF MARKETS
RESTAURANTS
30
SPLIT COMPACTING SIDE-LOADERS FOR RECYCLABLES
AND REFUSE
31
(No Transcript)
32
Recycle Central
_at_ Pier 96
33
(No Transcript)
34
(No Transcript)
35
Nova Scotia
  • 50 waste diverted from landfills in 5 years
    (Halifax 60)
  • 1000 jobs created since April 1996
  • Another 2000 jobs created in industries using
    separated materials
  • GPI analysis available on internet

36
Materials re-used in manufacturing in Nova Scotia
  • All cardboard
  • All paper
  • Most plastic containers and some plastic film
  • All waste paint
  • All organic material
  • All glass
  • All tires
  • Steel goes to Quebec

37
RESIDUAL SCREENING FACILITY
SCREENING FACILITY AT LANDFILL
DIRTY ORGANIC FRACTION
MORE RECYCLABLES
MORE TOXICS
NON-RECYCLABLE PACKAGING AND OBJECTS
BIOLOGICAL STABILIZATION
INTERIM LANDFILL
38
RESIDUAL SCREENING RESEARCH FACILITY
SCREENING FACILITY AT LANDFILL
NON-RECYCLABLE PACKAGING OBJECTS
Local University Department
RESEARCH FOR BETTER INDUSTRIAL DESIGN
INTERIM LANDFILL
39
  • If we cant re-use it, recycle it or compost
  • industry shouldnt be making it.
  • We need better industrial design for the 21st
    Century.

40
A comparison
  • With incineration
  • You convert three tons of trash to
  • one ton of ash
  • that nobody wants!

41
With a zero waste strategy
  • You convert three tons of trash into
  • One ton of recyclables
  • One ton of compostables,
  • and
  • One ton of education!

42
NEW ZEALAND
  • By 2004 over 60 of the municipalities in NZ had
    declared a Zero Waste goal by 2020.

43
GOOD LEADERSHIP
We need political and industrial leaders who
are visionary imaginative creative and WHO ARE
NOT BORING
44
HUMAN BORINGS
  • Have no imagination
  • have no vision
  • have no sense of humor
  • are obsessively tidy
  • confuse being clever with being wise
  • have more faith in machines than people
  • believe science and technology can fix every
    problem
  • believe man is the centre of the universe
  • And a womans place is in the kitchen!

45
Unfortunately, too many European engineers and
consultants are tackling the waste issue at the
wrong end of the problem
46
A BACK-END THINKER
1. A CUP 2. A BUCKET 3. A FOOT PUMP 4. AN
ELECTRIC PUMP
47
A FRONT-END THINKER !
48
When you build an incinerator, you are
Advertizing to the world the you were Not
clever enough - either politically Or
technically - to recover your Discarded
resources
THIS COMMUNITY IS NOT READY FOR THE DEMANDS OF
THE 21ST CENTURY.
49
Summary
50
WASTE IS A LOW TECH PROBLEM
DISCARDED MATERIALS
MIX
SEPARATE
Waste is Made by Mixing
Resources are Saved by Separation
WASTE MANAGEMENT IN THE CORPORATE INTEREST
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN THE COMMUNITY INTEREST
ZERO WASTE STRATEGY
LANDFILLS
INCINERATORS (PYROLYSIS ETC)
INDUSTRIAL
COMMUNITY
MEGA-LANDFILLS
RESPONSIBILITY
ASH LANDFILLS
51
VIDEOSpaul_at_fluorideALERT.org
  • On the Road to Zero Waste
  • Part 1 Nova Scotia, Canada
  • Part 2 Burlington, Vermont, US
  • Part 3 Canberra, Australia.
  • Part 4 San Francisco Bay Area
  • Pieces of Zero
  • Collection 1 Leadership and Creativity

52
Part 2
  • The arguments against incineration

53
Arguments against incineration
  • Toxic air emissions
  • Toxic ash
  • Extremely expensive
  • Extremely unpopular and undemocratic
  • A waste of energy!
  • There are better alternatives
  • Incineration is not sustainable

54
God Recycles The Devil Burns
55
Incinerators generate toxic ash
56
MODERN TRASH INCINERATOR
ELECTRICITY
TURBINE
WET SCRUBBER
SECONDARY CHAMBER
DE-NOX
STEAM
FABRIC FILTER
TEMP lt 200oC
CHUTE
BOILER
SEMI- DRY SCRUBBER
Ca(OH) 2
SUSPENSION
ACTIVATED CHARCOAL
GRATES
AMMONIA INJECTION
BOTTOM ASH
FLY ASH
TRASH
57
Politicians often approve incineration before
they have any idea where the toxic ash is going
to go!
58
INCINERATOR ASH - Sweden

59
Ash disposal in other countries
  • Germany puts fly ash into nylon bags and buries
    in salt mines (like nuclear waste)
  • Some Japanese incinerators vitrify the ash
  • Denmark sends its ash to Norway!
  • The Netherlands puts the fly ash into asphalt and
    the bottom ash into road building and cement
    blocks for building!
  • Italy?

60
Incineration is extremely unpopular
  • In the US over 300 incinerator proposals defeated
    since 1985
  • US has not permitted a new trash incinerator
    since 1995.

61
Incineration is a waste of energy!
62
Incineration is extremely expensive
63
Incineration is a poor investment
  • Most of the money spent on incinerators goes into
    complicated machinery and leaves the community,
    whereas
  • The money spent on the alternatives goes into
    jobs and stays in the community.
  • With incineration, after 20 years all you are
    left with is a huge pile of toxic ash, and
  • You will have moved no closer to a sustainable
    society.

64
Incinerators generate toxic air emissions
65
AIR EMISSIONS
CO2 H2O
ACID GASES HCI, HF, SO2 NOx
TOXIC METALS Pb, Cd, Hg, As, Cr etc
FINE PARTICULATE (SUB MICRON PARTICLES)
NEW COMPOUNDS PCBs PCDDs (DIOXINS) PCDFs
(FURANS) CHLORINATED BENZENES, PHENOLS,
NAPTHALENES ETC
MODERNARCHITECTS DO THEIRBEST
TODISGUISESMOKE STACK
66
Incinerator emissions are mutagenic and
carcinogenic
  • Cancer-causing substances emitted by
    incinerators
  • Arsenic
  • Cadmium
  • Dioxins
  • PCBs

Mutagenic substances can damage DNA in cells.
DNA damage can lead to mutations that may be
important factors in the development of cancers.
67
People who live near incinerators
  • Mercury levels in the hair of people living near
    a waste incinerator increased by 44-56 over 10
    years
  • Kurttio et al. (1998)
  • Three out of five studies found elevated dioxin
    levels in blood in communities near incinerators.
  • Miyata (1998) Deml et al. (1996) Van den Hazel
    and Frankort (1996) Startin et al. (1994)

68
  • Dioxin levels in the blood of people living near
    a new incinerator increased by 10-25 percent
    during the two years following the startup of the
    incinerator. Gonzalez et al. (2000)

69
Health Effects of Dioxins
  • Dioxins cause cancer
  • Dioxins cause neurodevelopmental effects
  • Dioxins alter immune function
  • Dioxins disrupt liver and kidney function
  • Dioxins alter sex ratios
  • Dioxins cause abnormalities of the sex organs
  • Dioxins cause endometriosis

70
DIOXINS IN OUR FOOD
  • Dioxins are fat soluble and persistent and
    accumulate in the food chain, specially animal
    fats. Well over 90 of our daily dioxin intake
    comes from dairy products, meat,and fish.

71
Dioxins - Major Concerns
  • One liter of cows milk gives the same dose of
    dioxin as breathing air next to a grazing cow for
    EIGHT MONTHS (Connett and Webster, 1987).
  • The liver cannot convert dioxins to water soluble
    products thus they steadily accumulate in human
    body fat.
  • Men cannot get rid of dioxins from their body fat
    BUT women can
  • By having a baby!
  • The highest doses of dioxin go to the fetus and
    have the potential to disrupt fetal development
    which is under hormonal control.

72
  • Dioxins disrupt at least six different hormonal
    systems, including
  • male and female sex hormones
  • thyroid hormones.

73
WE WANT DIOXIN
OUT OF OUR BABIES!
74
Institute of Medicine, 2003
  • Fetuses and breastfeeding infants may be at
    particular risk from exposure to dioxins due to
    their potential to cause adverse
    neurodevelopmental and immune system effects in
    developing systems

75
Institute of Medicine, 2003
  • The committee recommends
  • 1) the government place a high public health
    priority on reducing dioxin intakes by girls and
    young women in the years well before pregnancy is
    likely to occur
  • 2) Substituting low-fat or skim milk, for whole
    milkand other foods lower in animal fat by girls
    and young women

76
WE WANT DIOXIN
OUT OF OUR FOOD!
77
Dioxin in cows milkpg I-TEQ/g fat (ppt)
  • Average in Ireland 0.2
  • Denmark 2.6
  • Finland 0.83 - 1.17
  • France 1.81
  • Germany 0.71 - 0.87
  • Ireland 0.08 - 0.51
  • Netherlands 0.38 - 1.6
  • Spain 1.2 - 2.0
  • Sweden 0.93 - 2.0
  • UK 1.01
  • Italy ???
  • Measurements reported in 1999, (IOM, 2003).

78
Acerra, Italy
  • Samples collected March 2003
  • 10 pg I-TEQ /g fat in Sheeps milk
  • 30 pg I-TEQ/g fat in Sheeps milk in Casalnuovo.

79
Proponents claim
  • You dont have to worry because we have new tough
    air emission regulations

80
Even with the implementation of MACT Maximum
Achievable Control Technology concerns would
remain because these pollutants (dioxins and
toxic metals) are persistent, widespread, and
potent. National Research Council, 2000. Waste
Incineration Public Health.Washington, D.C.,
National Academy Press.
81
  • Dioxin levels in the blood of people living near
    a new incinerator increased by 10-25 percent
    during the two years following the startup of the
    incinerator. Gonzalez et al. (2000)

82
THE CHAIN OF PUBLIC HEALTH PROTECTION HAS THREE
LINKS.
STRONG REGULATIONS
ADEQUATE MONITORING
TOUGH ENFORCEMENT
IF ANY LINK IS WEAK THE PUBLIC IS NOT PROTECTED
83
While modern incinerators have reduced dioxin
emissionsthere is no real accountabilityin
Italy dioxin measurements only made three times
a year!
84
No accountability
  • Testing three times a year, means 54 hours of
    IDEAL data is being used to ESTIMATE 8000 hours
    of REAL operation.
  • Using a two week test Belgian scientists showed
    that the standard 6 hour test can underestimate
    dioxin emissions by 30-50 times (De Fre and
    Wevers, 1998)
  • Two week test now commercially available (AMEX
    system) -but few incinerators are prepared to put
    their dioxin claims to a real test!

85
No Accountability
  • Few (if any) studies of dioxins or toxic metals
    in blood, urine or hair of incinerator workers or
    local people living near incinerators in Italy
  • Few (if any) health studies of incinerator
    workers or local residents in Italy
  • Few (if any) studies of dioxins or toxic metals
    in food grown near incinerators in Italy.

86
Burning PlasticsImpacts on Human Health and the
Environment
  • Pat Costner
  • Greenpeace International
  • International Dialog
  • San Francisco, California
  • 26-27 August 2004

87
Incinerator workers
  • 11 studies have found increased levels of many
    chemicals in workers urine and blood. These
    chemicals include
  • dioxins, PCBs, hexachlorobenzene, chlorophenols,
    benzene, toluene, xylene, arsenic, lead, mercury,
    and nickel.
  • Sources Kumagai et al. (2002) Kumagai et al.
    (2001) Kitamura et al.(2000) Schecter et al.
    (1999) Kurttio et al. (1998) Van den Hazel and
    Frankort (1996) Wrbitzky et al. (1995) Papke et
    al. (1993) Malkin et al. (1992) Angerer et al.
    (1992) Schecter et al. (1991).

88
Incinerator workers
  • Increased death rates from cancer of the stomach,
    lungs and oesophagus.
  • Sources Rapiti et al. (1997) Gustavsson et al.
    (1993) Gustavsson et al. (1989)
  • Increased death rates from heart disease.
  • Source Gustavsson (1989)
  • Many other health concerns
  • chloracne, hyperlipidemia, decreased liver
    function, altered immune functions, altered sex
    ratio of offspring, hypertension, urinary
    abnormalities, small airway obstruction of the
    lungs, and abnormal blood chemistry.
  • Sources Kitamura et al. (2000) Schecter et al.
    (1999) Bresnitz et al. (1992).

89
People who live near incinerators
  • Mercury levels in the hair of people living near
    a waste incinerator increased by 44-56 over 10
    years
  • Kurttio et al. (1998)
  • Three out of five studies found elevated dioxin
    levels in blood in communities near incinerators.
  • Miyata (1998) Deml et al. (1996) Van den Hazel
    and Frankort (1996) Startin et al. (1994)

90
People who live near incinerators
  • Six out of seven studies found increases in
    various respiratory problems.
  • Sources Lee and Shy (1999) Legator et al.
    (1998) Shy et al. (1995) Gray et al. (1994)
    ATSDR (1993) Wang et al. (1992) Zmirou et al.
    (1984).
  • Four out of five studies found increased rates of
    congenital abnormalities.
  • Sources Cordier et al. (2004) Dummer and Parker
    (2003) Ten Tusscher et al. (2000) Aelvoet et
    al. (1998) Gatrell and Lovett (1989)
  • Two out of three studies found an increased
    frequency of multiple births or twinning.
  • Sources Van Larebeke (2000) Obi-Osius et al.
    (2004) Rhydhstroem (1998)

91
People who live near incinerators
  • A recent study of adolescent children who lived
    near two incinerators found
  • Increased levels of PCBs, dioxins and other
    pollutants in their blood.
  • Delayed breast development in girls which was
    positively correlated with concentrations of
    dioxins in their blood.
  • Delayed genital development in boys which was
    correlated with concentrations of PCBs in their
    blood.
  • Source Staessen et al., 2001. Lancet
    3571660-1669

92
People who live near incinerators
  • In 8 out of 9 studies increased death rates from
    cancer were observed. These included childhood
    cancer all cancers combined cancer of the
    larynx, liver, stomach, rectum, and lung.
  • Sources Elliot et al. (2000) Knox (2000) Knox
    and Gilman (1998) Michelozzi et al. (1998)
    Elliot et al. (1996) Biggeri et al. (1996)
    Babone et al. (1994) Elliot et al. (1992)
    Diggle et al. (1990)
  • In one study clusters of two cancers associated
    with dioxin (soft-tissue sarcoma and
    non-Hodgkins lymphoma, NHL) were found.
    Increased incidence of NHL found in another.
  • Sources Viel et al. (2000) Floret et al. (2003)

93
People living in regions with multiple
incinerators
  • National Research Council, 2000. Waste
    Incineration Public Health. Washington, D.C.,
    National Academy Press.
  • The committee has a substantial degree of
    concern for the incremental contribution to
    dioxins emissions from all incinerators on a
    regional level and beyond.

94
THE BAD LAW
Level of Pollution
THE GOOD LAW
Level of corruption
Level of Pollution
Public participation
95
POLITE PEOPLE GET POISONED ANGRY PEOPLE GET
ORGANISED !
96
But it is not enough to beat incinerators locally
  • We need an effective national and international
    strategy
  • In Italy AmbienteFuturo.interfree.it
  • Worldwide GAIA at
  • www.no-burn.org

97
THREE FINAL MESSAGES
  • TO CITIZENS
  • Dont let the experts take your common sense
    away.
  • TO POLITICIANS
  • Put your faith back in people. Stop trying to
    solve all your problems with magic machines and
    overpaid consultants
  • TO ACTIVISTS
  • Have FUN !!!

98
The Battle Hymn of Garbage
  • (Chorus)
  • We dont want incineration
  • We dont want incineration
  • We dont want incineration
  • We know theres a better way!

99
The Battle Hymn of Garbage
  • Mine eyes have seen the garbage
  • Thats a smoldering on the grate
  • We must stop incineration
  • Before it is too late
  • Unless we wish the dangers
  • We had better separate
  • And we must do it now!

100
The Battle Hymn of Garbage
  • (Chorus)
  • We dont want incineration
  • We dont want incineration
  • We dont want incineration
  • We know theres a better way!

101
The Battle Hymn of Garbage
  • While we recognize our landfills
  • All are swelling with the waste
  • It doesnt justify
  • A bad decision made in haste
  • Let us put our heads together
  • So the problem may be faced
  • And we must do it now!

102
The Battle Hymn of Garbage
  • (Chorus)
  • We dont want incineration
  • We dont want incineration
  • We dont want incineration
  • We know theres a better way!

103
Extra slides
104
Unfortunately, too many European engineers and
consultants are tackling the waste issue at the
wrong end of the problem
105
A BACK-END THINKER
1. A CUP 2. A BUCKET 3. A FOOT PUMP 4. AN
ELECTRIC PUMP
106
A FRONT-END THINKER !
107
A ZERO WASTE STRATEGY
  • Emphasizes organization over engineering.
  • Emphasizes long over short-term solutions.
  • Emphasizes front-end over back-end thinking.
  • Emphasizes closed loop versus linear thinking.
  • Emphasizes better industrial design.
  • Prioritizes community involvement.
  • Stimulates small business involvement.
  • Creates many jobs.

108
A ZERO WASTE STRATEGY
  • Creates 100s of little green boxes instead of one
    big black box.
  • Recovers rather than destroys material resources.
  • Saves the energy, pollution, solid waste
    generation, and global warming impacts of primary
    processing.
  • Is moving towards sustainability.
  • Connects with other key issues in sustainability.
  • Attracts EXCITING people with vision, imagination
    and creativity.
  • Requires politicians to work with CITIZENS

109

Dioxins 101
  • Dr. Paul Connett
  • Professor of Chemistry
  • St. Lawrence University
  • Canton, NY
  • paul_at_fluoridealert.org

110
MODERN TRASH INCINERATOR
ELECTRICITY
TURBINE
WET SCRUBBER
SECONDARY CHAMBER
DE-NOX
STEAM
FABRIC FILTER
TEMP lt 200oC
CHUTE
BOILER
SEMI- DRY SCRUBBER
Ca(OH) 2
SUSPENSION
ACTIVATED CHARCOAL
GRATES
AMMONIA INJECTION
TRASH
FLY ASH
BOTTOM ASH
111
MUNICIPAL WASTE INCINERATION A POOR SOLUTION FOR
THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY www.no-burn.org
112
AIR EMISSIONS
CO2 H2O
ACID GASES HCI, HF, SO2 NOx
TOXIC METALS Pb, Cd, Hg, As, Cr etc
FINE PARTICULATE (SUB MICRON PARTICLES)
NEW COMPOUNDS PCBs PCDDs (DIOXINS) PCDFs
(FURANS) CHLORINATED BENZENES PHENOLS,
NAPTHALENES ETC
113
DIOXINSThe chemical structures
114
Benzene Depictions
115
Biphenyl
116
Polychlorinated biphenyls
  • PCBs consist of two benzene rings joined together
    (biphenyl) with chlorine substituted for hydrogen
    at 1 to 10 positions. There are 209 PCBs.

117
PCDFs or FURANS
  • Furans (or PCDFs) have an oxygen atom forming a
    five membered ring (the furan) between the two
    benzenes of PCBs. There are 135 furans.

118

2,3,7,8-TETRA CHLORO DIBENZO FURAN
119
PCDDs or dioxins
  • Dioxins (or PCDDs) have two oxygen atoms linking
    the two benzene rings, forming the dioxin ring.
    There are 75 dioxins.

120

2,3,7,8-TETRACHLORODIBENZO-P-DIOXIN
2,3,7,8-TETRA CHLORO DIBENZO DIOXIN
121
There are 17 extremely toxic dioxins and furans.
They have chlorine at the 2,3,7 and 8 positions
7 Dioxins and
10 Furans
122
The biology
123
  • Dioxins and dioxin-like compounds are fat soluble
    and easily cross membranes and enter cell
  • Once in the cell they fit into a protein called
    the Ah receptor
  • Another protein joins this combination
  • This complex enters the nucleus and attaches to
    the DNA
  • It doesnt cause mutations, but it does switch on
    genes
  • Switching on genes results in the production of
    new proteins in the cell.
  • In other words it functions like a fat soluble
    hormone.

124
Two remarkable things about the Ah receptor
  • 1) After 30 years of research scientists do not
    know what it is in the cell for. They have not
    identified its normal function.
  • 2) The Ah receptor appears in evolution at the
    same time as the backbone appears in fish. Every
    species above invertebrates has the Ah receptor.

125
Dioxins chemically stable but extremely
biologically active
  • Dioxins switch on genes
  • Produce different proteins, including enzymes and
    growth factors
  • Disrupt at least six different hormonal systems
    male and female sex hormones thyroid hormones
    insulin gastrin and gluocorticoid.

126
The presence of dioxin can interfere with the
levels of a number of key substances in a living
cell
  • ENZYMES
  • Cytochrome P4501A1, Cytochrome P4501A2,
    DT-Diaphorase, UDP-Glucuronyl Transferase,Glutathi
    one-S-Transferase, Aldehyde Dehydrogenase,
    Ornithine Decarboxylase, Tyrosine
    Kinase,Thymidylate Transferase,
    Phosphoenolpyruvate Carboxykinase, Plasminogen
    Activator Inhibitor 2
  • HORMONES HORMONE RECEPTORS
  • Androgens, Estrogens, Estrogen receptor,
    Glucocorticoid, Glucocorticoid receptor, Insulin,
    Insulin Growth Factor, Thyroid Hormones, Gastrin
  • GROWTH DIFFERENTIATION FACTORS
  • Ras, Myc and Erb Oncogenes, EGF Receptor,
    TGF-alpha, TGF-beta 1, Beta 1, TNF-alpha,
    IL1-beta

127
The Politics
128
Keynote speaker at Dioxin Symposium in Toronto,
1989, says dioxin not a problem for humans
  • Dioxins have never been shown to kill one human,
    nor induce birth defects or cancer in humans, a
    US researcher says.
  • The widespread dread of the compounds could be a
    false alarm of historic proportions, said Curtis
    Travis, director of the office of risk analysis
    at the Oak Ridge National laboratory
  • PCBs and furansare shown by human health
    records to be equally harmless, despite
    widespread worry about them
  • Hundreds of millions of dollars in public money
    are being wasted on dioxin research
  • Toronto Star, Sept 18, 1989.

129
A status briefing for the Deputy Administrator of
the US EPA, 2-14-92
  • Dioxin does cause cancer in humans.
  • Cancer may not be the most sensitive toxic
    response
  • Recent evidence strengthens the conclusion that
    the sensitivity of humans is similar to that of
    experimental animals
  • Current exposure levels to dioxinappear to place
    people at or near a body burden where sensitive
    responses may occur, especially fornursing
    infants, recreational and subsistence anglers

130
Effects of dioxins on thyroid function of new
born babies
  • H.J. Pluim et al., The Lancet, May 23, 1992.
    (Volume 339, 1303)
  • Examined 38 new born babies, divided them into 2
    groups
  • Low-exposed (mothers had average 18.6 ppt dioxins
    in milk fat, range 8.7 - 28)
  • High-exposed ((mothers had average 37.5 ppt
    dioxins in milk fat, range 29 - 63)

131
Effect of Dioxins on Neonatal Thyroid Function
after Low-exposure and High-exposure at various
ages
132
Dioxin Tied to Endometriosis
  • Science, 262, 1373,
  • 26 November 1993

133
Our Stolen FutureHow Man-made Chemicals are
Threatening our Fertility, Intelligence and
Survival
  • Theo Colborn
  • John Peterson Myers
  • Dianne Dumanoski
  • 1994

134
Developmental Effects of Dioxins Linda S.
BirnbaumHealth Effects Research Laboratory, US
EPA
  • Environmental Health Perspectives,
  • 103 89-94, 1995

135
Exposure to dioxin and dioxin-like compounds as a
potential factor in developmental disabilities
  • Tom Gasiewicz et al.
  • Mental Retardation Developmental Disabilities
    Research Reviews,
  • 3 230-238, 1997

136
Regulatory levels
  • Outside US, Allowable Daily Intakes (ADI) range
    from 1 to 10 pg/kg bodyweight/day. WHO 1- 4
    pg/kg/day. Canadas ADI is 10 pg/kg/day.
  • In US EPA assumes no safe level for a suspected
    carcinogen uses health risk assessment instead.
  • In 1985 US EPA estimated that 0.006 pg/kg/day
    would yield a lifetime cancer risk of 1 in a
    million.
  • Industry has fought this standard for 20 years!
  • The latest draft from US EPA has lowered the
    level to 0.001 pg/kg/day.

137
In most industrialized countries
  • Citizens are getting between 1 and 2 picograms of
    dioxin TEQ/ kg bodyweight/ per day

138
DIOXINS IN OUR FOOD
  • Dioxins are fat soluble and persistent and
    accumulate in the food chain, specially animal
    fats. Well over 90 of our dioxin intake comes
    from dairy products, meat,and fish.

139
Dioxins - Major Concerns
  • One liter of cows milk gives the same dose of
    dioxin as breathing air next to the cows for
    EIGHT MONTHS (Connett and Webster, 1987).
  • In one day a freely grazing cow puts the
    equivalent of 14 years of human breathing into
    its body (McLachlan, 1995)!
  • The liver cannot convert dioxins to water soluble
    products thus they steadily accumulate in human
    body fat.
  • The man cannot get rid of them BUT A woman can
  • By having a baby!
  • Thus, the highest dose of dioxin goes to the
    fetus during pregnancy and then to the new born
    infant via breastfeeding.

140
Dioxins in cows milk - history
  • 1989 Dioxins in cows milk in Netherlands very
    high downwind of incinerators 12 ppt. Result
    16 Farmers not allowed to sell milk for 5 years.
  • German law
  • 1) cannot sell milk gt 5 ppt.
  • 2) 3-5 ppt, have to reduce source
  • 3) goal lt0.9 ppt.
  • In 1996, cows milk in Ireland average 0.23 ppt
    Ireland has no municipal waste incinerators.
  • In 1998, cows milk downwind of incinerators in
    France 15 ppt.Result Three incinerators
    closed.

141
Dioxin in cows milkpg I-TEQ/g fat (ppt)
  • Ireland Average is lt0.2 ppt
  • Denmark 2.6
  • Finland 0.83 - 1.17
  • France 1.81
  • Germany 0.71 - 0.87
  • Ireland 0.08 - 0.51
  • Netherlands 0.38 - 1.6
  • Spain 1.2 - 2.0
  • Sweden 0.93 - 2.0
  • UK 1.01
  • Measurements reported in 1999, (IOM, 2003).

142
The politics again!
  • The US EPA published its draft reassessment of
    dioxin in 1994 (which was virtually complete).
  • We are still waiting for the final version ten
    years later!

143
Institute of Medicine, 2003
  • Dioxins and Dioxin-like Compounds in the Food
    Supply
  • Strategies to Decrease Exposure
  • July 1, 2003

144
Institute of Medicine, 2003
  • Fetuses and breastfeeding infants may be at
    particular risk from exposure to dioxin like
    compounds (DLCs) due to their potential to cause
    adverse neurodevelopmental, neurobehavioral, and
    immune system effects in developing systems

145
Institute of Medicine, 2003
  • The committee recommends that the government
    place a high public health priority on reducing
    DLC intakes by girls and young women in the years
    well before pregnancy is likely to occur.
  • Substituting low-fat or skim milk, for whole
    milk coupled with other substitution of foods
    lower in animal fat by girls and young women in
    the crucial years before pregnancy

146
MODERN TRASH INCINERATOR
ELECTRICITY
TURBINE
WET SCRUBBER
SECONDARY CHAMBER
DE-NOX
STEAM
FABRIC FILTER
TEMP lt 200oC
CHUTE
BOILER
SEMI- DRY SCRUBBER
Ca(OH) 2
SUSPENSION
ACTIVATED CHARCOAL
GRATES
AMMONIA INJECTION
TRASH
FLY ASH
BOTTOM ASH
147
When it comes to dioxin and incinerators
  • Governments always say to the citizens
  • You dont have to worry
  • Because we have tough new air emission standards
  • But

148
THE CHAIN OF PUBLIC HEALTH PROTECTION HAS THREE
LINKS.
STRONG REGULATIONS
ADEQUATE MONITORING
TOUGH ENFORCEMENT
IF ANY LINK IS WEAK THE PUBLIC IS NOT PROTECTED
149
De Fre and Wevers (1998)
  • De Fre and Wevers compared 6 hour testing for
    dioxins with 2 week testing (on same incinerator)
  • They found 30-50 times higher concentration (mass
    divided by total volume of flue gas) in the 2
    week test compared to 6 hour test.
  • Reason 2 week test picks up upset conditions as
    well as start up and shut down.

150
Regulatory agencies have enormous power when it
comes to permitting incinerators
  • But little political will when it comes to
    protecting the public once the facility is built.
  • Health Risk Assessment
  • replaces
  • Public Health Protection
  • The people lose their health, their property
    values, even their homes, while
  • Consultants make a fortune!

151
4 COMPONENTS OF RISK ANALYSES.
1.
2.
STACK
3.
4.
1. ESTIMATION OF EMISSIONS. 2. CALCULATION OF
DISPERTION USING COMPUTER MODEL. GIVES GROUND
LEVEL CONCENTRATIONS. 3. CALCULATION OF HUMAN
UPTAKE. 4. EXTRAPOLATION OF HUMAN RISK FROM
ANIMAL STUDIES.
152
Politics versus Science
  • In 1993, it was discovered that one trash
    incinerator in Columbus, Ohio, was putting out
    984 grams of Dioxin TEQ per year
  • This was more than the whole of Germany, twice as
    much as the Netherlands and three times as much
    as Sweden - for all sources.
  • The Ohio EPA did a health risk assessment and
    declared that there are no substantial health
    risks posed

153
Politics versus Science (cont.)
  • The Columbus Health Department put out a Dioxin
    fact Sheet for citizens
  • They explained that one part per trillion was
    equal to taking a 1 second vacation after working
    31,700 years.
  • They converted the maximum emission rate from the
    incinerator to 1341.9 ppt
  • One part per trillion (ppt) is equivalent to
    taking a 1 second vacation after working 31,700
    years. The maximum emission is equal to 1,342
    seconds or a 22.4 minute vacation taken in 31,700
    years (if a person worked all year)
  • or if a person worked 40 hours per week it would
    take 133,567 years to earn the 22.4 minute
    vacation.

154
Politics versus Science (cont.)
  • Prior to a second dioxin test of the incinerator
    (March 94), the following excerpts appeared in
    the plant operators log
  • We lost our north end trash last
    weekendRemember the tests are very important and
    is our future 2-14-94
  • We must have a good source of trash for the
    test 2-15-94.
  • It appears the second shift crane operator used
    the good, dry material on Sunday 2-18-94
  • This test is our future and I would think
    everyone would be extremely interested in helping
    out if possible. 2-21-94
  • Continue to hold the M.R. trashwe will fill the
    area up with M.R.trash in preparation for our
    testing. 2-22-94

155
Politics versus Science (cont.)
  • The Columbus Health Department brought in a
    consultant (Dr. Greg Rigo) to put the dioxin
    problem into perspective.At a press conference
    (which got front page coverage) he presented an
    inventory of dioxin emissions in the US
  • 33,000 grams Dioxin enters the US environment
    annually
  • 62 from unknown sources (possibly volcanoes
    and rotting wood)
  • 20.5 from motor vehicles
  • 4.0 from the production of herbicides
    pesticides
  • 2.6 from ALL US MUNICIPAL WASTE INCINERATORS
  • combined (approx. 130 at that
    time)
  • 2.0 from chlorine bleaching of paper
  • PROBLEM - 2.6 of 33,000 grams is 850 grams per
    year, which was less than the output from the
    incinerator (984 grams per year) he was
    supposedly investigating!

156
Politics versus Science (cont.)
  • Dr. Greg Rigo was hired by the Vinyl Institute to
    investigate the relationship between the chlorine
    content in trash and dioxin emissions. In a memo
    they described Rigo as user friendly.
  • Rigo found that there was no relationship between
    chlorine content and dioxin emissions!

157
THE BAD LAW
Level of Pollution
THE GOOD LAW
Level of corruption
Level of Pollution
Public participation
158
POLITE PEOPLE GET POISONED ANGRY PEOPLE GET
ORGANISED !
159
Citizen involvement
  • Greenpeace involvement from the 1980s.
  • First Citizens Conference on Dioxin, Chapel
    Hill, NC, 1991 (transcript and 10-part video
    series).
  • Second Citizens Conference on Dioxin, St. Louis,
    Missouri, 1992.
  • Third Citizens Conference on Dioxin, Baton
    Rouge, Louisiana, 1994.
  • Formation of Health Care Without Harm, 1994.
  • Dying from Dioxin, Lois Gibbs et al 1996.
  • Formation of the Global Alliance for Incineration
    Alternatives (GAIA) in South Africa, 2000
    (no-burn.org and grrn.org)

160
WE WANT DIOXIN
OUT OF OUR BABIES!
161
WE WANT DIOXIN
OUT OF OUR FOOD!
162
God Recycles The Devil Burns
163
Even if you made incineration safe You would
never make it sensible. It simply does not make
sense spending so much money destroying
resources we should be sharing with the
future. (PC)
164
When you build an incinerator, you are
Advertizing to the world the you were Not
clever enough - either politically Or
technically - to recover your Discarded
resources (PC)
THIS COMMUNITY IS NOT READY FOR THE DEMANDS OF
THE 21ST CENTURY.
165
INCINERATION IS NOT SUSTAINABLE
166
Zero Waste 2020
167
MOVING TOWARDS THE FRONT END -we need to design
waste out of the industrial system
NO TO INCINERATION
NO TO LANDFILL
168
RESIDUAL SCREENING RESEARCH FACILITY
SCREENING FACILITY AT COMMUNITY CONTROLLED
LANDFILL
DIRTY ORGANIC FRACTION
MORE RECYCLABLES
MORE TOXICS
NON-RECYCLABLE PACKAGING AND OBJECTS - RESEARCH
FOR BETTER INDUSTRIAL DESIGN
BIOLOGICAL STABILIZATION
INTERIM LANDFILL
About PowerShow.com