First, he says the Adams Mine proposal is dead. Opposition is rising in Michigan to the import of Ontario's waste - communities along the 401 are raising concerns about truck traffic in an effort to accelerate plans to widen the highway. The Adams Mine promoters have fought an expensive, lengthy and tenacious battle to get approval for their shortsighted and foolish scheme. I do not believe they will accept defeat as quietly as they appear to have done these last few weeks. The second comment I would disagree with is Larry's support of incineration as a quick fix for Toronto's dilemma.
Incinerators merely move the problem from one part of the environment to another - land to air.
We would still need a landfill to dispose of the ash - which would now be classified as hazardous waste because of the residue of metals and toxins left by burning at even the highest temperatures. Incinerators are very expensive to build and have to be fed to justify the capital investment - therefore they work in opposition to waste reduction. Finding a host community for an incinerator would be even more difficult than finding a happy host for a landfill site. Incinerator emissions have been identified as a prime source of lead pollution - from burning all those batteries we use, among other things. Lead is recognised as a persistent neurotoxin to which children are particularly susceptible.