Document nkYjJKDQXowObJwgja5ozvYxR

% HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #45 Froi RACHEL: Weekly news and resources for citizens fighting toxics -- October 5, 1987 Part 4: S C IE N T IS T S S T U D Y HOW 'M A S S B U R N * IN CIN ERATO RS PRODUCE DIO XIN, BUT P U B L IC 'S F E A R S M A Y N O T D IS A P P E A R When municipal garbage goes into a "m ass b u rn " incinerator, one of the products that goes out the smokestack (or is trapped b y a filte r and e nd s up in an ash landfill) is the family of chemicals called dioxins. No one disputes that dioxins are produced by mass burn incineration, but scientists disagree on where the dioxins come from. Ju st a few years ago, many scientists were saying that the dioxins was produced by low-temperature combustion (less than, say, 1400 degrees Fahrenheit). T h e y advocated that incinerators should be designed to burn hotter to "b u rn u p " the dioxins or perhaps not ever create the dioxins at all. O thers scientists were saying that dioxins was produced by the b u rn in g of pvc plastic and if we would just keep the p v c out of the w aste stream , all would be well. Dr. B a rry Commoner had a different idea. He th o ugh t that d ioxins was being created inside the smokestack itself, after the smoke left the combustion chamber of the incinerator. If he was right, running the firebox hotter w ouldn't prevent the formation of d io xin s. He did some e x p e ri ments, wrote up his results, and then began advocating his ideas. H e's a pe rsu asive sp e a k e r and a to u gh o p p on e nt in a debate. His effective argum ents angered his opponents and th e y began to call him a charlatan and a "p se ud o -scie ntist." Recently, new research has confirmed D r. Com m oner's o rig in a l ideas. In the Journal of Chrom atography, V o l. 389 (1987), p g s. 127-137 and in Science Vol. 237 (A u g u s t 14, 1987), p g s. 754-756, Canadian scientists report that they have found a major mechanism fo r c re a tin g d io x in s in waste combustion : the fly ash (the particles that make up the smoke in the sm okestack) acts as a catalyst (a chemical prom oter) and causes the formation of dioxins. They reported experim ents in w hich they created dioxins with chlorine-containing wastes but they also reported creation of d ioxins from non-chlorinated com pounds. Science News (A u g . 22, 1987, p gs. 118-119) quoted one of these researchers sa y in g , "We found that [fly ash] is indeed a v e ry strong catalyst which causes d ioxins to form from almost a n y th in g ." T h ey are now hard at work t ry in g to m anipulate the composition of garbage to minimize the production of certain types of fly ash catalysts, especially th o se c o n ta in in g metals. Pigm ents in p rin tin g in k s, for example, contain metals that may produce fly ash that produces d io x in s. T h e y th in k that g e ttin g the metal out of garbage might substantially reduce dioxin production. Still other recent research throws additional light on the "dioxin from mass b u rn " problem. Experim ents at an in cin e rato r in Pittsfield, M a ssa ch u se tts were aimed at d isc o ve rin g relationships between combustion conditions, garbage constitu ents, and dioxin production. The report, Results of the Combustion and Em issions Research Project at the Vicon Incinerator F a c ility in P itt s fie ld , M a s s a c h u s e t t s appeared in Ju n e , 1987. Some of its more interesting conclusions were: * * T h e re is no evidence that the amount of P V C p lastic in the g a rb a g e affects the amount of dioxin produced (pg. 10-4); * * Wet ga rb a ge produ ce s more d io x in s WELCOME TO NEW READERS We got your name from friends who told us you are interested in solving the problem of toxics. If your mailing label says "Exp:" followed by a num ber, you will receive four free issues of Hazardous Waste Hews; if you do not respond by the 4th issue, we will stop bothering you. If your label says "Special" we've sent you iust this one issue be cause we think its contents will interest you. Stories in the levs are drawn from a large pool of information in RACHEL, the Remote Access Chemical Hazards Electronic Library, a computerized database for use by the media, local governments, schools, libraries, and citizen activists. Anyone with a tabletop computer (Apple, Commodore. 1BH-PC or whatever) can dial into RACHEL with a modem and extract useful information. For free access to RACHEL, write us. C00073 than drier garbage (pg. 10-4); * * There is no consistent relationship between the amount of dioxin in the raw garbage and the amount of dioxin in the smoke stack gases (pg. 10-5); * * There js a relationship between the amount of carbon monoxide in the sm okes tack gas and the amount of dioxin ( p g s . 101, 10-5); "H o w e ve r," the report sa ys, "one m ust be cautioned that the specific relationships between operating tempera ture, carbon monoxide levels, and levels of [dioxins] found during this study cannot necessarily be generalized to other in cinerators, particularly of a different d e sig n ." * * T he location of m easuring devices in the incinerator affects how much dioxin is found (pg. '10-1). What can we conclude from all t h is ? Authors of the Pittsfield study say future research should focus on the effects of facility design and operation (especially carbon monoxide levels, operating tempera ture, and air pollution control system s) on the production of dioxins, instead of focusing on characteristics of the garbage. On the other hand, the Canadian researchers believe that manipulating the contents of the garbage is the key to discouraging dioxin production. From the citize n s perspective, faced with a machine that wfil be in operation for 20 to 30 y e a rs, d u r in g w hich time the chemicai contents of American garbage are H keiy to ch an ge dramatlcafly ( If the iast 20 or 30 ye ars are a n y indication), try in g to manipuiate the contents of the garbage seems compiIcated, untrustworthy and doomed to fail. No governm ent authority wHi e ve r be able to control the contents of the stream of garbage entering a mass burn incinerator. On the other hand, try in g to fin d and maintain the exact operating conditions that minimize dioxin formation (a narrow range of tem peratures, for example, a n d 100 ppm of carbon monoxide in the sta ck ) seems equally hopeless. Garbage incinerators are not going to be ru n under laboratory conditions b y chem ists. T h e y 're g o in g to be run b y garbage companies who have dem onstrated time and time a ga in that th e y'll cut a n y corner n e ce ssa ry to make a b u c k , The garbage Ind ustry, Including the Incineration in dustry, Is dominated b y organized crime or. b y people who competed with organized crime and won out. These are not the k in d of people to whom yo u want to entru st an enormous, complex and dangerous machine, the careful operation of which will dramatically affect public health and safety. In a n y case, knowing what minimizes dioxin production under controlled condi tions cannot ease the p u b lic's fear that m ass b u rn wilt pollute the air. T h e fty ash researchers w riting in Science noted that "more than 600 orga n ic com pounds" have been identified on Incinerator fly a sh . That's 600 more than the public w ants to breathe or dump into the local landfill. D ioxin Is sim ply No. 601 on the p u b lic's fist of unwanted pollutants from mass b urn . T he Pittsfield stu d y is N Y S E R D A Report 87-16, available from Department of Communications, NY State E nergy R&D Authority, Two Rockefeller Plaza, Albany, N Y 12223; phone (518) 465-6251. iu ar ii oM Ihrla M m Is published weekly by Environaontal Research Foundation* P.O. Booc 5541* Princeton* NJ 08543. Editori Pater Montague* Fh.D.) Assistant Editorsi Annette Eubank* Marla B. Pellerano. The Mews is nailed first class every Monday fron Princeton* HJ. Subscriptiont M l per year for Individuals and non-profits* JM for students and senior citizens* M H B for businesses.