Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 1 Apr 1993

Vol. 429 No. 1

Adjournment Debate. - National Waste Incinerator.

Ms Keogh

I raise this topic on foot of reports in daily newspapers which quote the Minister as saying we must burn our own toxic waste. The Minister also said that Ireland will have to face up to reality and build its own toxic waste incinerator, but I ask him to what reality does he refer? We all know that there is toxic waste here, but our first premise should not be to accept the present level of toxic waste and concede the need to build a national incinerator. There are some questions that need to be asked in this regard. For example, how much toxic waste is generated here and why is it being generated here? How can it be reduced? How is it being treated at present and what are the future options? We do not know how much toxic waste is generated at present. I would like to know the steps this Government is taking, if any, to persuade companies using toxic materials to find replacements to reduce the amounts and recycle materials. Is the Minister aware of the number of companies who have voluntarily undertaken programmes of waste reduction?

We should regard these ventures as pilot programmes and learn from them. They can show us the way to deal with waste. I cannot accept the Minister's view that Europe is imposing the solution of a toxic waste incinerator on us although I have views on the emphasis the EC is putting on waste disposal. I earnestly entreat the Minister to introduce the new waste legislation as a matter of urgency and to place major emphasis on waste prevention and minimalisation.

We should have a policy on regional waste management. Some local authorities have organised successful pilot programmes. We need to establish such programmes nationwide.

We could make a start by a public education programme to alert people on the steps they can take at home, in the garden, in schools, at work and in garages to minimise waste and to control the use of toxic materials, which are in daily domestic use. I find it disturbing that our whole emphasis is topsy-turvy. Indeed, it was borne out at Question Time today that we are not putting enough emphasis on waste reduction. One report says that once a hazardous waste incinerator is built it will become a disincentive to waste reduction and prevention and a stimulus to polluting industries to move to Ireland. My great fear is that the signal we are sending out will give a totally wrong picture of the way we should be addressing our waste problem. I ask the Minister to bring forward the anticipated legislation as soon as possible and place the emphasis on prevention and recycling instead of disposal in land filled sites and by incineration.

Minister for the Environment (Mr. M. Smith)

I find it extraordinary that Deputy Keogh reacts in this way to words that were most definitely used by me in an interview, which were exactly the same as those attributed to Deputy Desmond O'Malley in September 1992 regarding the provision of a national toxic waste incineration facility.

Mr. Dukes

——and by Deputy Liam Kavanagh in 1984.

Mr. M. Smith

I do not wish to put the Deputy in conflict with her leader on this issue, but it is no harm to put the position on record.

Mr. Dukes

The plan started in 1984.

Mr. M. Smith

Irish waste policy is committed to respecting the hierarchy of waste management strategies established by the European Community. This gives primacy of place, where possible, to waste prevention, followed by promotion of recycling, reuse and then by the optimisation of final disposal methods for waste which cannot be reused. We have recently developed a number of initiatives to assist waste prevention and reduction. These include a study of clean technologies commissioned by my Department from international consultants and the establishment of relevant information services for industry. Nowhere in the European Community is it the case that waste prevention measures account at present for anything but a relatively small proportion of overall waste generated. Other waste management strategies are also necessary, as is envisaged in the EC Framework Directive. Among these other strategies, incineration is well recognised and extensively practised throughout the industrialised world. I find it extraordinary that countries like Denmark and the Netherlands, which are constantly cited as the countries that give primacy of place to the environment and lead the field in terms of implementation of EC directives, have both placed incineration at the centre of how they manage waste which cannot otherwise be used.

Environmental standards are becoming increasingly higher. At EC level there are two directives already in place in relation to municipal waste incineration, a further draft directive on the incineration of hazardous waste and a draft directive on packaging waste which recognises incineration with recovery as a reasonable environmental solution. Against this widespread recognition of waste incineration as an environmentally acceptable strategy, it would not be sensible for us to discard incineration as a possible solution to certain difficult waste management problems. Irish policy on this question was set out in the Environmental Action Programme 1990 which recognised the need for sophisticated and safe methods of disposal for hazardous waste and proposed to grant-aid the provision of a central hazardous waste incinerator. Subsequently the need for this facility was endorsed by the Culliton report, which pressed for an early decision on the safe disposal of hazardous waste to facilitate further industrial development.

Without prejudice to the overall policy established in the Environmental Action Programme, my Department for some time, has been conducting a more detailed review of hazardous waste management requirements in the light of various developments since 1990. It is proposed, for instance, that the draft EC directive on hazardous waste incineration would encompass clinical waste. We have approximately 150 small, relatively inefficient hospital incinerators operating around the country which do not meet the best international standards. This requires action and we must consider how best to replace these existing facilities. In addition, the dumping of sewage sludge at sea must be discontinued from 1998 for environmental reasons but the disposal of this waste on land may not be feasible in all cases. What then is the best solution? In short, waste disposal problems will not go away. There are no simple answers. Incineration must be considered, at least, as one element of the solution.

I intend to announce a strategy based on the current review in the context of the new national development plan. The status quo is not a viable option. The thrust of EC environmental policy is towards self-sufficiency and involves disposal of waste as near as possible to its source, making use of the most appropriate technologies to ensure environmental protection. This thinking is reflected in the increasing reluctance of other EC and EFTA countries to take waste from elsewhere.

While we have made notable progress in recent years in recycling industrial solvents, the rate of recycling now stands at 70 per cent, Irish industry still generates some 60,000 tonnes of hazardous waste per annum. Indeed, a significant residue of this is currently exported for disposal by incineration and other means. I have to continue to seek a derogation in order to be able to export our waste, for which we have no immediate solutions.

We are currently examining the optimisation of waste management resources through the application of a mix of strategies. To suggest, as some interests do in a one-sided way, that the issue of waste can be addressed solely by relying on either waste prevention or disposal or that one approach excludes the other is to create a false impression. We will continue to promote waste recycling and prevention but we are realistic enough to accept that a range of safe disposal options is also essential.