Kaipara cautioned over waste to energy idea

Small New Zealand rural councils such as Kaipara are being targeted by overseas companies involved in waste incineration for power generation because doors are closing in other countries.

This was the message delivered by Zero Waste Network director of external affairs, Sue Coutts, to a Kaipara District Council meeting last week.

She said as well as Kaipara, councils in Waimate, Feilding and Te Awamutu had been approached.

“The idea of creating jobs and local economic development is attractive to councillors and mayors, and they then tend to become ‘salespeople’ for the proposals,” Coutts said.

Zero Waste is critical of Kaipara’s decision to investigate a waste-to-energy incinerator, in conjunction with Auckland Council, Whangārei District Council, Far North District Council, Northland Inc and Te Uri o Hau.

“It is based on the false choice between a landfill and an incinerator. Incinerators still need landfills for the toxic ash and wastewater they create. They don’t eliminate waste – they just transform it into new, more toxic waste including air, land and water pollution containing deadly dioxins.”

Coutts said council resources would be better spent on renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, and it would be better to invest in resource recovery strategies and changing people’s behaviour.

“Landfills and incineration plants are basically the same thing because they depend on a continual stream of waste materials to make the economics work,” she said.

Sue Coutts, from Zero Waste, addressed a Kaipara District Council meeting last week, encouraging them not to pursue any waste to energy project.

“Burning rubbish and burying rubbish are both disposal strategies that take us in the wrong direction.

“Council and Government are heading towards a low waste/low emissions future, and Kaipara’s Climate Action Plan is a good example of how you are doing that locally.

“Globally, the two big sources of emissions from the waste sector are methane from organics in landfill and C02 emissions from burning plastics, and it doesn’t make sense for Kaipara to create a big new source of emissions just when other parts of the world are stepping back from incineration.” are an easy target because we don’t have the regulatory framework to deal with incinerator applications.

“Small councils are faced with doing all the due diligence around the risks and cost/benefits of these proposals. Plus, the evidence that is being brought to the table isn’t being critically examined.”

Landfills and incineration plants are basically the same thing because they depend on a continual stream of waste materials to make the economics work downturns and covid, Coutts said this was because councils were continuing to spend the bulk of their budgets on disposal strategies.

Coutts suggested that councils work together, pointing to Waikato as an example, where a network of councils has commissioned a report on waste-toenergy efficiencies.

“We’re not choosing to invest in the things up the hierarchy that would make a difference.

“But the Auditor General has said that unless government and councils start to invest in reduction strategies they will face increasing costs for waste disposal.

Coutts talked about the risks involved in incineration, which burns a mixed rubbish feedstock.

“This doesn’t magically disappear, so you get emissions to air and emissions to water.

“The incinerator companies are looking for markets across New Zealand. We

She says if an incinerator was set up in Kaipara, it would become a magnet for all the rubbish in the region because they depend on bulk flow. This would be regardless of whether or not it was recyclable, compostable or reusable.

Questioned on the fact that since around 2000, waste volumes to landfills have only ever increased, except during economic

“Where we’ve seen it working is where government has said that instead of blowing $350 million on an incinerator or landfill, let’s commit to resource recovery infrastructure, composting infrastructure and behaviour change programmes to change the game. We know it’s pretty easy to get 70 per cent out of the waste stream if you choose to invest in that work.”

Asked why councils were reluctant to invest in waste reduction rather than endof-life strategies, Coutts said that in order to reduce waste, councils had to spend money up front and that was a barrier.

“We are seeing the game change with more investment from government through the waste levy.” (see also Viewpoint page 9)