Action Alert

* Last chance to stop HB228 Renewable Energy Source Amendments. This bill
is bad for Utah's air quality.

Locate your senator
lhttp://www.utahsenate.org/map.html

Background
Rep. Roger Barrus' (R-Centerville) &fact sheet' was developed by Nathan
Rich, Executive Director of Wasatch Integrated Waste Management District
[formerly known as the Davis Incinerator}. Mr Rich is an able advocate
for his industry.

1
Reduce pollution & air toxics
This bill gives tax incentives to waste incinerators that were created to
increase emissionless renewable energy projects in Utah. If passed these
projects would count toward Utah's already weak renewable energy goals,
despite being refinery sized sources of pollution.

2
Refinery sized emissions
When you listen to Rep Barrus describe HB228, he doesn't mention that the
Davis incinerator is Davis County's
3rd largest source of NOx in Davis (behind Chevron & Holly)
4th largest for SOx (behind Chevron, Holly & Flying J)

3
Failed public safety
Rep Barrus says that DAQ will make sure any new municipal waste
incinerator is located safely, but Stericycle medical waste incinerator
was built in empty fields & now homes are backed against the property
wall. Recently there was an explosion at the Woods Cross Refinery, which
blew homes off their foundations. This refinery also was built away from
homes, but public safety somehow was not protected..

If the Legislature gives a stamp of approval to incinerators, DAQ will
know their funding is threatened if an applicant doesn't get favored
source treatment. Other, cleaner industries will not have available
'space' in the airshed because of the refinery sized emissions of a waste
incinerator.

4
Dioxins, cadmium, lead & mercury
An incinerator is a huge investment, & after it is built, operators will
advocate for recovering their investment, no matter how many breakdowns
occur or community complaints. Whatever amounts of persistent toxins it
emits, they will accumulate in the neighborhood. The Davis incinerator
is allowed to emit dioxins, cadmium, lead & mercury, the levels are
greatly reduced by pollution controls, but the emissions of these toxins
are not zero.

5
No mitigation
Rep Barrus' bill doesn't even specify some of the mitigation options
available, for instance removing electronic waste, batteries, & other
sources of toxic emissions before burning; or a requirement to locate
such a dangerous source of toxics & air pollution away from population
centers.

6
Betrayed
Utahns who care about clean air will feel betrayed, rightly, by this
Legislature if incinerators are given incentives.

7
Disadvantages of waste incineration.
http://msw.cecs.ucf.edu/Thermochemical%20Conversion.ppt
[updated 2008]
High capital cost
Skilled operators are required (particularly for boiler operations)
Some materials are noncombustible
Some material require supplemental fuel
Air contaminant potential (MACT standards have substantially reduced
dioxin, WTE 19% of Hg emissions in 1995 – 90% reduction since then)
Volume of gas from incineration is 10 x as great as other thermochemical
conversion processes, greater cost for gas cleanup/pollution control
Public disapproval
Risk imposed rather than voluntary
Incineration will decrease property value (perceived not necessarily
true)
Distrust of government/industry ability to regulate

8
Locked in
Rep Barrus says US generates 2x the waste of European Union. Building
an incinerator that needs fuel to supply
energy that we need, locks us into this 2x the rest waste of the
developed world average.

9
Budget cuts to regulators
In the era of increasing budget cuts, regulation could be come less
effective, inspections could become less frequent. What if some
corporate decision is made to 'optimize' the bottom line. Citizens & DEQ
would have a hard time catching a bad player, especially they have the
'blessing' of our one party legislature. It is instructive to think
about the many episodes with Energy Solutions, started with bribes, and
continues to be a seemingly insatiable maw attracting bad things to Utah.

10
Energy production
The calculations about the energy production depend on who is
doing the calculation & which technology, the operator, optimum
performance vs real world experience, what assumptions are made about
inputs, which upstream inputs are counted. It reminds me of the claims
about corn ethanol.