Urgent changes at an unprecedented level never before seen in human history are needed to save the planet from environmental collapse. Nova Scotia has responded to this clarion call from the world’s leading scientists by paying a company to burn old tires.
The Department of Environment announced today it’s awarded industrial approval for Lafarge Canada to burn 350,000 scrap tires as fuel for the company’s Brookfield cement plant.
Lafarge will receive $367,5000 in public money to subsidize its efforts.
The license is only for a 12-month period. At least to start. Similar environmental approvals are normally granted 10 years at a time.
“The shorter period allows the province to ensure that terms and conditions are being met, and can be modified if needed to ensure the environment and human health are protected,” writes spokesperson Bruce Nunn in a press release.
But Ecology Action Centre policy director Mark Butler says once the fire is lit it will be hard to put out.
“The EAC is of the view that once the tire burning infrastructure is in place at the Lafarge plant it will be difficult for government to reverse the decision to burn tires, regardless of monitoring and test results,” Butler writes via press release.
Environment minister Iain Rankin first gave Lafarge Canada the go-ahead for its tire-kiln pilot project last summer. The decision was appealed by nearby residents and environmental groups who felt the province had failed to adequately consult the public and that Lafarge’s plans were based on shoddy science. The appeal was ultimately rejected by the courts.
Research from Lafarge and Dalhousie University suggests that the global manufacturer can reduce its Brookfield plant’s greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent just by switching from coal to scrap tires.
Phasing out coal is one of the quickest methods countries around the world will need to take to reduce GHG emissions, according to a dire report released earlier this week from the world’s leading climate scientists.
The authors of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change study warn there are only 12 years left to keep the planet from warming an additional 1.5C and thus stave off catastrophic environmental failure.
Achieving that goal will require urgent and unprecedented changes from all aspects of society, including a severe curtailing of greenhouse gas emissions.
But Nova Scotia’s scrap tires were already being reused as something more useful than coal-replacement. The old rubber would be chopped up by C&D Recycling and spread as infill in roadwork projects.
Without a supply of tires, local engineers will instead need to use mineral aggregates. The mining of those products is considerably more carbon-intensive than any savings calculated by Lafarge, says Butler.
“Burning tires, rather than recycling them, will not reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions in Nova Scotia, will undermine recycling and will pose an additional health hazard to local residents,” Butler states. “In addition, taking tires away from the recycling industry and giving them to Lafarge to burn will result in a net loss of jobs and economic activity.”
Burning tires, even when carefully monitored, risks releasing toxic dioxins and dangerous heavy metals in the local environment.
According to today’s press release, Lafarge will have to undertake air quality monitoring at regular intervals whenever the tire kiln is lit. Groundwater and surface water monitoring is also required.
Setting up those monitoring systems will be a little easier thanks to the $1.05 per-tire subsidy Lafarge will be paid by Divert Nova Scotia. The money comes out of an environmental fee Divert NS collects from consumers who buy new tires.
“It is EAC’s view that Divert NS, which describes itself as fostering a culture of recycling in Nova Scotia for over 20 years, does not have the moral authority to collect a fee which will be given to a company to burn, not recycle, tires,” states Butler.
Lafarge had previously put forward a tire-burning plan in 2007 but it was rejected by Nova Scotia’s Tory government for having too many risks. The following year, the legislature passed a bill outright banning tire burning in the province. It was never proclaimed.
Today the NS NDP announced it will re-introduce that bill in response to the Liberal government’s Lafarge decision.
“We shouldn’t be burning tires for fuel, especially when they could be recycled,” states Lenore Zann, NDP environment critic. “Today’s decision will not only degrade Nova Scotia’s environment but further damage our reputation as a leader in tackling climate change.”
Nova Scotia produces roughly 1 million scrap tires each year.
Related Stories
Halifax is right to be excited about its new Green Network Plan
Offshore anarchy
Offshore drilling a recipe for disaster
Forestry review needs further review
This article appears in Oct 4-10, 2018.
Really??? Burning tires is some kind of solution that anyone would come up with in this day and age? Convert the plant to natural gas, supplement with renewables? Anything has to be a better solution to coal than tires.
Natural gas (obtained from fracking) is more environmentally damaging in any respect than burning a waste product that would otherwise eventually end up in our water table.
If the tires can be burned in an environmentally responsible way, which with todays technology around exhaust scrubbing and high temperature incineration is quite possible, why not use them productively. Those that immediately cry fowl have to realize that dumping these tires in a landfill is not a better solution and there is a nearly inexhaustible supply being created every time we drive our vehicles. The science has already proven this technology to be cleaner than conventional coal burning which makes it better than what is in place now. It may not be the final solution, but it is a step in the right direction.
An honest & factual comparison of the costs and benefits is what is required. C&D is subsidized to process the tires, just as Lafarge is to burn them; what are the costs per tonne?. Neither burying under a road, nor burning in a kiln is worthy of being labelled recycling, since both are end of life processes for the materials. They both keep tires out of the landfill and that is a good thing. What does the Province pay for chipped tires for road-fill versus aggregate? What happens to the residuals from both processes and is there additional costs or benefits from these residuals? Cost per tonne of coal versus the tires; GHG numbers, energy produced, toxic emissions comparisons, what else? Probably a few more viable comparisons. Plus a look to the future; is there a true tire recycling option that is economically sustainable? Could a change in what tires are made of make them easier to recycle? Reinventing the wheel in this case is perhaps worthy of pursuing? This topic has greater depth than put forward in this highly biased news article. Trump’s type sensational reporting is not what is required to discuss and report on today’s important issues. The Coast can do better.
If you think that Lafarge is going to invest in equipment for a 1 year trial period, you’re sorely simple. That technology costs money, and it’s typically a long run to return the cost. so the Minister can lie all she wants, but big business once again gets a pass.
Agree with jdcas- Lafarge will receive less $ per tire than current recycler. They are not getting all the tires. They’re burning less coal. What any of us or the EAC knows of the actual science of high temp incineration is negligible. Maybe we should boot Lafarge and import our cement @ immense cost, just like we are now doing with fracked natural gas from other locales. (Sarcasm intended).
Too bad people can’t be bothered investigating at least a few facts before they start spouting off. One of the often repeated misinformation that is spread, even by such entities like the Ecology Action Center, is that tires are being recycled. The amount of recycling even when used in pavement and as agregate is so small in comparison to the number of tires we dispose of. The key reason is, you can only use a small percentage in either or it becomes unstable. So as a stop-gap, we, the consumer through the environmental fee, pay to have the tires shredded, some goes to recycle and the remainder get put into the ground and buried. Burning is not my first choice either but we can’t keep hiding them in the ground and so we hope work continues on finding solutions. Lafarge currently burns mostly petcoke and some coal. They use bunker oil if there is problems with the other fuels and they also currently burn some alternative fuels such as shredded roofing shingles. All are dirtier fuels than the tires will be. Dalhousie did trials and studies that show a reduction in nitrous oxide, acid rain causing and carbon monoxide, greenhouse gasses. We need cement, heat is necessary in the process, why not try to cut the emissions.