Salem City Club sparks outrage with one-sided garbage burner program

It hurts when an organization you like screws up, then offers up a weak explanation for why the screw-up happened.

That's why I'm so disappointed with the Salem City Club, which has decided to only have Marion County representatives speak at a February 21 program about the Covanta garbage burner in Brooks -- a decision that has outraged environmentalists who urged the City Club to also have someone speak about the downsides of the garbage burner.

Which are many, as this excerpt from an Oregon League of Conservation Voters post says.

When you think of clean energy, what do you think of? If you’re like most people, you think of wind turbines on a gusty hill, or solar panels on a sunny rooftop. If you’re like Covanta — one of the biggest waste-incineration plants in Oregon — you think of burning trash.

But waste incineration is by no means clean energy. Burning trash contributes heavily to air pollution, and to climate change. In fact, on many levels, it’s far worse than fossil fuels. Covanta’s waste incineration plant adds nitrogen oxides, dioxins, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, and heavy metals into the air, putting nearby communities at risk of severe asthma attacks, birth defects, strokes, and respiratory problems. That’s anything but clean.

Last week I was included in email exchanges between environmentalists from the local chapter of 350.org and City Club members in charge of the garbage burner program. My sympathies then, as now, are with the environmentalists.

For after failing to have the Oregon legislature approve a bill in 2019 that would grant Renewable Energy Credits to Covanta, there's another effort underway in the upcoming 2020 short legislative session to pass a similar bill.

Here's a message that Andy Harris sent to state Representative Brian Clem on this subject.

January 11, 2020

Dear Brian [Rep. Clem],

 

I have known you for many years through Salem City Club and have valued and supported your positions on most legislative issues, in particular on climate and health. However, in my opinion your support of renewable energy credits for Covanta Marion is an unfortunate mistake. I would encourage you to stand up to political pressures from Marion Co. Commissioners, Senate President Courtney, and industry apologists.

 

Much has changed since Covanta Marion was first approved and constructed in the mid-80s. Greenhouse gases (GHGs) have become more of a known threat to the heating of our planet. We now know that the incinerator, which burns plastics, medical waste and municipal trash, is the state’s 19th largest industrial producer of GHGs. We also know that when waste is burned, nearly all of the carbon is immediately emitted into the atmosphere as a Greenhouse Gas (GHG).  

 

Incinerators accelerate the release of GHGs and speed up the process of global heating, whereas landfills slow the release of CO2 into the atmosphere. At a modern landfill, such as Coffin Butte, about three quarters (74% - 81%) of the GHGs remain sequestered indefinitely, especially the carbon sequestered in plastics. Landfill technology has further improved so that about half of the methane released at Coffin Butte is captured and used as an energy source.  

 

The term renewable energy credits [RECs] refers to naturally renewing resources.  RECs are intended to encourage the development of clean, new sources of energy, like solar and wind power, not for energy from burning dirty garbage and medical waste.

 

Covanta Marion not only releases GHGs into the atmosphere, it spews heavy metals and toxic chemicals into the air we breathe. The toxic emissions that go out the stack are dispersed over the countryside, waterways, towns and schools, where they can harm human health and wildlife. The heavy metals include lead and cadmium from the burning of paper and cardboard.

 

Ingestion of these compounds by children causes learning disabilities, lowered IQ, hyperactivity and attention deficit.  Other heavy metals emitted by Covanta Marion include zinc, mercury, copper, and nickel. The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality has named the incinerator one of its top priorities for reducing toxic air pollution.

 

Moreover, incineration of solid waste at Covanta incinerator creates new compounds like dioxins, the active ingredients in Agent Orange and the most toxic chemicals on the planet, other than radioactive isotopes. Dioxins are formed when organic material (like wood and paper) are heated and cooled in the presence of chloride products (like PVCs from medical waste plastics).

 

Dioxins also are created and released by the burning of wood products treated with creosote and other chemical preservatives, and by the burning of materials impregnated with flame retardants. Dioxins are carcinogenic, cause birth defects, are powerful endocrine disrupters, suppress the immune system, and decrease fertility.

 

Incineration does not make solid waste magically disappear. One quarter of all the trash burned remains as residual bottom ash and fly ash, a toxic brew of heavy metals and chemicals that must then be trucked [to] a landfill, an additional trip that emits more diesel exhaust into our communities.

 

Covanta Marion incinerator would have us believe that they need renewable energy credits to remain in business, despite the fact that they have been profitable since 1987 without RECs. The intent of any legislation should be to award RECs to encourage new, innovative, clean energy sources, rather than to subsidize the burning of toxic municipal and medical waste. After 33 years of operation, it is time to close down this old, polluting incinerator for the health of our planet and the health of our people. 

 

Thank you for your careful consideration. 

 

Sincerely yours,

Andy Harris, MD

Board of Directors

Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility

 

So Marion County, which handles the Covanta contract and is overseen by an all-Republican Board of Commissioners who, so far as I know, are all global warming deniers (Sam Brentano definitely is), gets to use the February 21 City Club program to present a one-sided view of how wonderful the Covanta garbage burner is, and why renewable energy credits should be bestowed on the Covanta corporation.

This makes no sense to me, especially since February 21 is right in the middle of the February 3 - March 7 legislative session.

By not allowing an environmentalist like Andy Harris to be able to refute the claims of the Marion County representatives who will have the podium all to themselves, the Salem City Club has chosen to align itself with one-side of the Covanta garbage burner debate -- which happens to be the side that has the least scientific credibility, in my view.

Yet here's a screenshot of the February 21 City Club program description:

Wow. There's so much wrong with this. "Differing scientific opinion" is how global warming deniers rationalize their refusal to acknowledge the scientific consensus around climate change. 

I don't believe there is a valid scientific case to be made in favor of allowing the Covanta garbage burner to continue spewing pollutants.

Yet the City Club is only allowing Marion County representatives to speak on February 21, where, according to the program, the representatives will explain why continued support of the garbage burner is justified, along with Covanta's effort to get renewable energy credits.

Why isn't the City Club presenting both sides of what it calls "differing scientific opinion"? As a long-time City Club member, this bothers me. A lot. 

Tonight I did get a message from someone who was tasked with trying to explain to us skeptics why the City Club is handling the garbage burner program the way it is. Below is the message, which I don't find very persuasive.

I deeply doubt that the Marion County representatives are going to present the scientific case against the Covanta garbage burner, or will limit their talk to being an "information session only."

Thus I think the Salem City Club is making a big mistake by not allowing both sides to speak on February 21, and will end up regretting having chosen to give Marion County free rein to praise the highly polluting garbage burner. The City Club person said:

We have thought of this impending program long and hard, and have conceived of it from the start as hearing Marion County's position on this controversial issue.

 

We understand that there are very strongly held alternative beliefs, and during the program we will both make that clear and insist that the Marion County representative also does that. But we felt at the time, and continue to feel, that the technological and financial implications of the whole issue are complicated enough to merit an information session solely. 

 

Personally, I am coming to the position that a pro/con session (call it a debate or not...) might well be unsatisfactory to everyone and serve to confuse the issue. This is not consistent with the purposes of the City Club, as I hope you will agree.

 

The County, furthermore, is the public sector entity that is ultimately responsible for the decision, (whether we like that or not) and they control the budgetary and licensing implications for all of us.

   

Further, however, I agree with you that they are ultimately responsible for taking into account in their decision the environmental health of their constituents -- possibly a more important consideration than the financial.  (I personally would intend to bring that issue up immediately in the question and answer period.)

 

Also, personally, I think the issue of green energy credits for such an operation is somewhere between a real stretch and a farce. And I realize that issue will be before the Legislature as we speak. 

 

However, I tend to discount any argument that the timing, therefore, is unfortunate. I'm not sure there's any relationship that we should worry about. We are not speaking in our program to support or not for that bill -- it wasn't an issue when we first had contact with Marion County last fall about doing this program. 

   

I hope you attend and listen carefully to the program. Your thoughts, then and now, are welcome.

 

Well, just City Club members are allowed to ask questions. Others only get to ask a question if no City Club members have raised their hand to do so.

 

Further, it is emphasized that questions should be just that, not statements. So it will be very difficult for members of the audience to refute what the Marion County representatives say in the brief period allowed for questions.

Comments

[Skyline]

Burn baby, BURN!
And the next time that you plug in that electric vehicle that is made up of 70% petroleum based materials, remember to be thankful for the electricity that comes from "somewhere".

[Skyline]

Oh, and Brian,,,,,,
I know that you mainly cater your posts to ultra liberals,
But do you think that the rest of us are SO STUPID as to await the incineration process carefully monitored by the DEQ and EPA at Covanta, with your irrelevant and deceptive picture of open-burning of trash in an open field?
Really????
Brian, you are WAY TOO sharp and persuasive to have to stoop to such obvious spin.
Casts a shadow and doubt over the entire content of the post.

[Brian Hines]

Skyline, that wasn't my photo, It was the photo that accompanied the League of Conservation Voters post.

[Skyline]

Thank heavens!
I have never, ever doubted your integrity or honesty.
I'm relieved! Sorry to have had to inquire.
Now as to the League of Conservation Voters ....
Not feeling so good about the posting of that deceptive, disingenuous, illustration.