One of the common tech and science-based proposals to the perennial trash problem plaguing our towns and cities is waste-to-energy (WTE), which often sounds like a win-win solution as it turns what we regard as waste into useful electricity, which is something that we all need.
On paper, it looks great. How can you go wrong if you find a way to turn trash into electricity? The technology is already there, from simple incineration to high-tech pyrolysis or gasification which theoretically produces less air pollution than the former, WTE is fast becoming a go to solution for many towns and cities that are struggling with solid waste management.
After all, how can any city official say no to a project that proposes to turn waste into electricity, which can be sold back to consumers? As long as the environmental issues such as emissions and air pollution are addressed by mitigating measures and technology, WTE should be a no-brainer, especially in cities where landfills are overflowing with trash that never seems to stop coming in.
As long as a WTE project is approved by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and complies with all relevant laws, it is a solid waste management solution that deserves exploration by the country’s towns and cities.
However, there is a caveat that our government has to settle at the national level before we can fully commit to WTE.
The thing about the Solid Waste Management Act (RA 9003) is that it emphasizes recycling and composting, which means that if it were properly implemented and enforced, the only waste that should be sent to our sanitary landfills would be the so-called residual waste, which is ironically not the ideal fuel for most of the cleaner WTE technologies that are allowed by the Clean Air Act (RA 8749), which bans outright incineration, but is silent on pyrolysis or gasification.
If our local governments would properly implement a SWM program that is compliant with the law, reusables, recyclables, and compostables should be sorted at the source and therefore never make it to the sanitary landfills, which should only receive residual waste. The problem with properly sorted residual waste is that it has very low energy value, which would directly affect the viability of most WTE projects.
The way things currently are being done, where there is still absolutely no sorting at the source, decades after RA 9003 was passed, is ironically ideal for most WTE applications. However, if our local governments are planning to slowly but surely work towards full compliance with the SWM law, which should be a goal because it is after all a law, WTE facilities that are built might end up not having enough waste that qualifies as fuel. This lack of synergy is a common feature in a government where legislators are usually neither qualified nor competent, having been voted into power by virtue of name recall, political dynasty, or the ability to master the latest viral dance craze.
The SWM-WTE internal conflict is one that our government has to settle or find a good middle ground if WTE is going to be deployed as a viable SWM solution.
It may be time for the government to reassess its SWM roadmap. If we are still committed to waste reduction at source, what WTE technologies are applicable and should be prioritized? If we are going to accommodate other WTE tech, then the segregation algorithm may have to be modified to allow other high energy value wastes (usually recyclables) to be fed as fuel instead of being recycled. The question that will need to be asked is if it is recycling or WTE that has the most benefit to the environment and our cities, which usually depends on the maturity of the technology that is available. This is a question that experts and scientists will need to debate over, and something that our honorable congressmen and senators may not be able to understand, given the depth of their competencies and experiences. But in the end, it is them who will produce the legislation that will determine the direction our country will go when it comes to how we are going to deal with our trash.
This is an interesting issue because there are no right answers, as technologies and systems for SWM, WTE, recycling, the circular economy, and other ways of dealing with waste are still developing and evolving. But as the garbage dumps and landfills run out of room, our leaders have to choose the best available path for the country, because that is their job.
Different countries have different solutions, some working better than others, all depending on their own unique situations. The difference lies in how their systems are established through legislation, and then in implementation and enforcement. Every aspect has to work properly or all we get is a mishmash of short term solutions that just end up leaving bigger problems for the next generation.
Hopefully our public officials can all work together, with a long-term and sustainable mindset, as we have wasted too much time struggling with our long-running problems with the trash that we’ve been generating.*
