Regional Councillor Report

Submitted by: Colleen Jordan, Regional Councillor Wards 3 & 4

Date: Oct. 22, 2007

Regional Council - Oct. 10, 2007

Designate Ajax as an Underserviced Area for Family Physicians

Regional Council endorsed the motion passed by Ajax Council at its meeting Sept. 24, 2007 to reaffirm its support for the Town of Ajax application to the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care to be designated as an underserviced area for family physicians.

Energy from Waste Facility

Delegations were received by Ajax Council citing their concerns regarding the potential health effects from an energy from waste facility being cited in Clarington.

A copy of the 4^th Report of the British Society for Ecological Medicine, 2005, by Dr. Jeremy Thompson and Dr. Honor Anthony entitled “Health Effect of Waste Incinerators” had been received by the Health Committee from a delegation. This report provided the following conclusions and recommendations:

Conclusions

1) Large epidemiological studies have shown higher rates of adult and childhood cancers and of birth defects around incinerators. Smaller studies and a large body of related research support these findings, point to a causal relationship, and suggest that a much wider range of illnesses may be involved.

2) Recent research has confirmed that particulate pollution, especially the fine particulate (PM2.5) pollution which is typical of incinerator emissions, is an important contributor to heart disease, lung cancer, and an assortment of other diseases, and causes a linear increase in mortality. Incinerators are in reality particulate generators, and their use cannot be justified now that it is clear how toxic and carcinogenic fine particulates are.

3) Other pollutants emitted by incinerators include heavy metals and a large variety of organic chemicals. These substances include known carcinogens, endocrine disruptors, and substances that can attach to genes, alter behaviour, damage the immune system and decrease intelligence. The dangers of these are self-evident. Some of these compounds have been detected hundreds to thousands of miles away from their source.

4) Additional dangers arise from radioactive particulates emitted from incinerators licensed to deal with hazardous waste.

5) Incineration only reduces the volume of waste by 30-50%. Modern incinerators produce far more toxic fly ash (air pollution control residues) than older incinerators; these pose important long term health risks. No adequate methods exist for the disposal of this ash.

6) The greatest concern is the long-term effects of incinerator emissions on the developing embryo and infant, and the real possibility that genetic changes will occur and be passed on to succeeding generations. Far greater vulnerability to toxins is documented for the very young, particularly foetuses, causing cancer, spontaneous abortion, birth defects or permanent cognitive damage. A worryingly high body burden of pollutants has recently been reported in two studies of cord blood from new-born babies.

7) Waste incineration is prohibitively expensive when health costs are taken into consideration. The EC Commission figures indicate that a single incinerator could cost the tax payer up to £50 million a year. Recent American data showed that strict air pollution control has saved tens of billions of dollars a year in health costs.

8) Waste incineration is unjust because its maximum toxic impact is on the most vulnerable members of our society, the unborn child, children, the poor and the chemically sensitive. It contravenes the United Nations Commission on Human Rights, the European Human Rights Convention (the Right to Life), and the Stockholm Convention, and violates the Environmental Protection Act of 1990 which states that the UK must prevent emissions from harming human health.

Recommendations

1) The safest methods of waste disposal should be used.

2) Health costs should be routinely taken into account when deciding on waste disposal strategies.

3) The present limited method of risk assessment by which the safety of proposed installations is judged, is inadequate, cannot be relied on, and should be reviewed.

4) Tackling the problems of both the amount and the nature of waste generated is of critical importance, with the emphasis on reducing the production of waste and on recycling.

5) The serious health consequences of fine particulate pollution have become apparent in the last ten years: incinerators are a major source and, in our considered opinion, incineration is the least preferred option for getting rid of waste. Taking account of all the information available, including research indicating that there are no safe levels for fine particulates, we can see no reason to believe that the next generation of incinerators would be substantially safer than the previous ones.

6) Far safer alternative methods are now available including recycling, mechanical biological treatment and plasma gasification: a combination of these would be safer, would produce more energy, and would be cheaper than incineration in the long run, much cheaper when the health costs were taken into account. These more up-to-date methods should be employed.

7) It is particularly important that incinerators should not be sited in deprived areas or areas with high rates of mortality where their health impact is likely to be greatest. This can only add to health inequalities. [NB. Presently 9 out of 14 incinerators have been built in the most deprived 20% of wards (257)].

8) This report outlines the many deficiencies of present monitoring procedures. We recommend the introduction of a stricter and more comprehensive system for the monitoring of all waste-burning plants by a fully independent body, including random unannounced visits: the monitoring should include:

a) more monitors around incinerators to measure particulates and heavy metals

b) periodic monitoring of the content of dust in homes in the locality

c) periodic monitoring of the heavy metals and dioxins in the fly ash

d) a programme of monitoring the body burdens of some key pollutants in local inhabitants.

9) We recommend that no further waste incinerators be built.

The entire report can be found at www.durhamenvironmentwatch .ca