Massachusetts' great garbage debate

Last week, campaigners from the Massachusetts Public Interest Research Group (MassPIRG) delivered over 12,000 signatures to state environmental officials urging them to resist lifting a moratorium on new incinerators.

A deposit on water bottles? (AP)

The state is in the middle of drafting the 2010-2020 Solid Waste Master Plan – read that as what should we do with our garbage – and emotions are flying high because officials are considering ending the early 1990s-instituted moratorium. David Abel wrote a good overview about the issue in early May here.

MassPIRG argues that more incinerators could weaken already modest state recycling efforts. They want state officials to make a huge push to get residents and businesses to recycle, reuse, and reduce waste. They say with a little effort – such as adding a deposit onto water bottles and ensuring more people recycle paper – the state could halve the amount of waste being sent to landfills and incinerators.

“The commissioner has a clear choice: a decade of more garbage, more burying, and more burning; or a plan which finally gets us on an ambitious road to reduce/reuse/recycle,” says Janet Domenitz, executive director of MassPIRG.

More incinerators? (Wendy Maeda/Globe photo)

Incineration was once a common way to get rid of waste, but that lost its allure because of pollutants and smells that belched from smokestacks. Today, there are seven operating in Massachusetts.

Incinerator lobbyists and some scientists say technology is allowing new plants to operate cleaner and more efficiently. Plus, they note, some 1.5 million tons of trash a year are exported from Massachusetts and if it was burned locally, it could replace some fossil fuels. Some municipal officials say a push needs to be made on recycling, but that alone won’t solve the state’s garbage woes.

The state expects a draft plan out on the solid waste in the fall – and then will give the public time to comment.

What do you think is the right strategy?