Don’t Throw That Ash Into the Air; There Are Better Ways to Handle Trash : Air pollution in the city and areas to the east will be increased at a time when our air quality already violates federal standards, and is getting worse.

The subject of municipal waste and its disposal has occupied the attention of San Diego decision makers for many years now.

The basic strategy they have come up with to deal with the shortage of landfill space has been incineration. The city’s intransigent commitment to incineration, irrespective of predictable adverse consequences and public opposition, is the reason for the Clean Air Initiative, Proposition H, on the Nov. 3 ballot.

This unyielding commitment is amply illustrated by the city’s request to the California Energy Commission that the SANDER incinerator project planned for San Diego be suspended rather than withdrawn pending a vote on Proposition H, although Signal Environmental Systems Inc. had canceled the project because of community resistance.

The health-threatening consequences of burning solid waste in the City of San Diego are predictable. Air pollution in the city and areas to the east will be increased at a time when our air quality already violates federal standards, and is getting worse.

Toxic substances such as acid gases, oxides of nitrogen, chlorinated dioxins, sulfur dioxide and heavy metals will be added to the high levels of pollutants in the San Diego air basin. San Diego, the nation’s seventh-largest city, already ranks second-worst in ozone pollution. All of these substances have documented harmful effects on humans. Because San Diego is affected by air inversions, these toxic air pollutants will be trapped and concentrated. Some will interact with other gases to produce smog.

In addition, incineration concentrates toxic substances in the ash residue and complicates the disposal of ash.

Environmental Protection Agency tests last year found that ash leached significant quantities of toxic metals into water when it was passed over the ash. The metals included highly toxic substances such as lead, cadmium, mercury and arsenic. All of these have been associated with human disease and death. Lead poisoning remains a major public health problem; cadmium is a known cause of kidney and other damage; mercury has been associated with outbreaks of fatal illnesses, and arsenic is a well-known poison, as well as a carcinogen and neurotoxin at sublethal doses. Ash contains sufficient quantities of these metals to leach them into rainwater.

The EPA reported this year that “some fraction” of ash from trash incinerators contains enough toxic metals to be considered hazardous under federal law. In Germany, nine of 46 incinerator plants are required by law to handle ash residue as hazardous waste. Classifying incinerator ash as hazardous will dramatically raise disposal costs and place a substantial drain on an already overburdened hazardous-waste disposal system.

The commanding officer of Miramar Naval Air Station recently advised SANDER that it would not permit disposal of hazardous ash in the Miramar landfill. The safe and economic disposal of incinerator ash presents a serious challenge to those advocating its use in San Diego.

Proposition H is the citizens’ statement that we want less, not more, air pollution in San Diego. It achieves this result by amending San Diego’s General Plan by placing four requirements on incinerators that would burn more than 500 tons of trash per day:

- They may not be built if they would increase the level of toxic air pollutants in the city.

- They may not be built within three miles, which is the area of greatest air pollution fallout, of a hospital, elementary school, child care center or government-licensed nursing home.

- They may not take water from our treated water supply.

- They must separate and recycle the most hazardous materials before the remainder is burned.

Why is Proposition H necessary?

First, there are no comprehensive local, state or federal regulations governing the siting, operation and monitoring of incineration projects.

Second, those laws that do exist do not seem to influence the judgment of those decision makers who are committed to incineration. The Progress Guide and General Plan for the City of San Diego provides that “use of alternative energy sources should not conflict with standards of air pollution or other environmental pollution.” Incineration as a policy option for dealing with municipal solid waste conflicts with this provision. Yet this conflict is seemingly ignored.

State law also has not been effective in blunting our decision makers’ enthusiasm for incineration. State law provides that air pollution permits are not to be issued for projects burning municipal waste if the project prevents or interferes with the attainment or maintenance of state and federal air quality standards.

Notwithstanding the fact that the SANDER project, which was proposed to burn 2,200 tons of waste per day in Kearny Mesa, would clearly violate state law by contributing more than seven tons of pollution to our air every day for up to 30 years (the estimated life of the plant), city officials are steadfast in their support of incineration.

Proposition H is aimed at the major polluters and despoilers of the city’s environment. It applies only to those facilities that would burn more than 500 tons of trash per day. Proposition H is based on the premises that there are cheaper and safer alternatives to the landfill problem. It does not foreclose those options that would safely dispose of San Diego’s trash without polluting our air and endangering our health. In fact, it encourages the use of safe options, such as recycling, composting, source separation, compacting and so on.

Without Proposition H, one thing is certain: More toxic pollution will be added to the air we breathe.