JOHANNESBURG -- Environmentalists here are troubled by a rash of applications to build incinerators to dispose of medical and hazardous waste.
The only thing that worries them more than the applications they know about
is the possibility that many more are being processed without their
''Incinerators do not make waste disappear - they reduce it to ash and to
atmospheric emissions, both of which are potentially dangerous,'' says
Leila Mahomed, who coordinates the Anti- Incineration Alliance, a coalition
of environmental groups in Western Cape province.
Many industrial nations are phasing out the use of waste incinerators. But
environmentalists here have stumbled upon proposals to build new ones - a
number of them in densely populated regions.
Nine medical waste incinerators are being proposed in Gauteng, South
Africa's most thickly populated and heavily industrial province.
In the southwest, Denel Corporation, the country's largest private arms
manufacturer, has asked to build a waste incinerator between two low-income
communities: Mitchells Plein, a mixed race or so- called coloured
community, and Khayelitsha, a black community that is home to about 600,000
people. The government of Western Cape province has not announced whether
it will approve the permit.
''We have many cases of tuberculosis, HIV, cancer and asthma,'' says
Khayelitsha community activist and 10-year resident Thabang Ngcozela. ''If
you bring in the incinerator to this residential area you increase the
attack on people's immune systems.''
Because the central, provincial and municipal government officials who
receive the applications are not routinely required to make the documents
public, however, environmentalists fear they've only seen the tip of the
iceberg. For their part, officials declined repeated requests for comment.
Companies are required to disclose their incinerator proposals but
community advocates say the public notices contain insufficient information
and are not readily accessible.
''If the advertisement is in English that cuts out about 85 percent of the
population,'' says Muna Lakhani of Earthlife Africa.
Lakhani and Mahomed are among a small but determined army striving to
convince the public and government alike that the country should focus on
reducing the amount of waste they generate in the first place, and to steer
clear of incinerators because they emit chemicals hazardous to human health
and the environment.
Nationwide, environmental groups including Earthlife Africa, the
Environmental Justice Networking Forum, and Group for Environmental
Monitoring are calling for a moratorium on the approval of any new
Incinerator proposals are put through an environmental assessment process
by provincial authorities and are further reviewed by the national
government's department of environmental affairs and tourism. Critics
charge, however, that the process fails to account for the release of
dioxins, furans, lead, and other potentially harmful substances that are
emitted into the air when waste is combusted.
These chemicals are known to disrupt the body's regulation of hormones.
Exposure to dioxins also has been linked to cancer, sterility, birth
defects, and weakened immune systems. Dioxins are considered global
pollutants because they can travel long distances, remain in the
environment for a long period of time, and build up in the food chain.
''In a country ravaged by AIDS, which weakens the immune system, one would
think that authorities would be very concerned about incinerator issues,''
Low-income and black communities usually bear the brunt of the pollution,
say activists, because incinerators are often built near these
''The people who really suffer from incinerators are black communities,''
Lakhani says. ''We are still carrying the legacy of apartheid.''
Ellen Nicol, a lawyer at the public interest law firm Legal Resources
Centre, says that once granted, permits to operate incinerators often are
renewed even when companies fail to comply with their contracts.
''But even if they were complied with, the requirements do not adequately
protect health and the environment,'' Nicol asserts. Ash resulting from
incineration, she adds by way of example, is not properly regulated.
Government regulations only require that "the ash is disposed of, but just
in a regular municipal disposal site, not a hazardous waste site, even if
the ash is hazardous,'' she says.
Incinerators also must comply with national air pollution laws but many
environmental groups say the 1965 Air Pollution Prevention Act is outdated
and merely recommends standards to be voluntarily observed. Parliament is
drawing up a new law.
In the United States, more than 280 incinerator proposals have been
defeated or abandoned since 1985 because of public opposition. In France,
authorities have closed down three municipal waste incinerators in Lille
because high concentrations of dioxins were found in locally produced cow's
milk. Turkey's environment minister decreed in 1999 that all waste
incinerators would be phased out.
Citing the examples of waste management programmes in other countries,
Mahomed of the Anti-Incineration Alliance says the best possible
alternatives to incineration are waste reduction and separation.
''Manufacturers need to be encouraged to stop producing substances which
cannot be recycled, reused or composted,'' she says, adding that these
methods can recover between 45 per cent and 75 per cent of the original
volume of waste.
Other alternatives include using ultra-violet light and chemical and
mechanical disinfection to sanitize waste before it is recycled or put into
In Western Cape province, the Alliance has proposed setting up a waste
management system in hospitals that separates rubbish from recyclable
products such as cans and bottles.
Since the new government took power in 1994 and environmental protection
was written into the constitution, many laws including the National
Environmental Management Act have helped environmentalists make a strong
case against incineration, adds Mahomed.
''But,'' she says,'' it is going to be a while before actual change in
environmental management happens on the ground,'' she says.
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.