We asked, Should Durham Region build an incinerator in Clarington? Why or why not?

I have lived in Clarington all my life, until 4 years ago, when we moved to the City of Kawartha Lakes. I am very concerned about being in the air shed of your incinerator. You are trying to force this on people without the proper information being available to them as to the consequences of said incinerator. I implore you to follow proper proecdure and have a risk survey and environmental impact survey done. Screw the consultants, consult the people!!! Terry Thompson

-- Terry Thompson, City of Kawartha Lakes

No! We should be increasing the recycle, reuse, reduce process. We need to work towards a sustainable environment which does not include the production of useless waste materials(excessive packaging etc) that needs processing. Let's change the way we live to promote a healthy clean community to live in for now and in the future.

-- Nancy Barnes, Clarington

An incinerator is a step backwards. We need strong leadership to develop and implement a Zero-Waste Strategy. Take the $250 million dollars earmarked to build an incinerator and put it to waste diversion and elimination actions/legislation and we would be solving the real problem at hand. Global warming is upon us. We do not have time to waste. If we do not have leadership that is willing to undertake this, they should step aside.

-- June Davies, Uxbridge

Should we accept: - respiratory diseases/cancers? - lethal chemicals/nanoparticles in our body? - Indifference about crops, dairies, water, air? - decreased property values? - tax increases? - depleting resources? - landfilling/exporting ashes? - road congestion/damage? - spewing out 24/7? - indifference about recycling and legacy? - that some benefit at the expense of us all? If the answer is “NO” to any, then we should NOT build an incinerator.

-- Paul-André Larose, Oshawa

I don't think an incinerator is appropriate for Durham Region. It's unhealthy and a sure tax grab. Roger Anderson, you have two choices, either the incinerator goes or YOU go.

-- Christine Jackson, Clarington

I have recently have woken from a nightmare. My Dr. pounded me with antibiotics all through my childhood. I am extremely sensitive to many man made products, carpet, paint, glue etc....I have spent thousands of $ (no help from gov.) to heal myself (not to mention that I can't work anywhere). Now I'm told I can look forward to a slow death from Nano particles, filling my lungs,penatrating the blood barrier of the brain and poisoning our bodies. These consultants have given no thought to the people recovering from illness, the elderly or our children and pregnant women. There are many many schools close to the chosen site. What are the thinking? The packaging industry has to be addressed first, changes, need to be made.

-- Greg Bradshaw, Clarington

No incinerator should ever be built anywhere for the sake of quality of our lives. We need stringent recyclng/reuse of our garbage as a resource; for this reason, all levels of government, industry and people need a plan how to go about it; but, we would have to start right now, so that the need for the landfill is eliminated or lessened. Both, an incinerator and recycling need landfill. Money would be saved, and more jobs would be created!

-- Libby Racansky, Clarington

Incineration burns tomorrow's resources. Period. We need to study our residual waste and figure out how to create products that do not end up as residual waste! If you can't reuse it, recycle it or compost it, it shouldn't be made! We need to change the way we think and live. Incineration should not even enter the discussion.

-- Kristin Robinson, Clarington

Durham Region should not build an incinerater because: it is irresponsible to poison our air even more with the toxic emissions that will inevitably result. Garbage does not disappear; matter cannot disappear, it simply is converted to another form of matter, in this case more condensed, i.e. more toxic. Also we will view garbage as fuel, which will result in less of the 3R's whcih are our only hope for our 'environment'.

-- Liz Creswick, Ajax

I am opposed to incineration as a way to deal with residual waste. I believe that municipalities should jointly work together to compile data on what waste is generated and is not recyclable or recycled and then lobby provincial government to enact regulation or legislation forcing the manufactures of this waste to progressively change policy to, if you can’t recycle, reuse, or rebuild it, then you can not produce or create the waste stream.

-- Dave Renaud, Clarington

NO! Absolutely No! Incineration is a bad solution to the waste crisis, regardless of where it is located BUT to situate it so close to thousands of residences is appalling! I believe that the citizens of the area are largely opposed and the ones that aren't are ill-informed!

-- Gail Bradley, Clarington

NO to incinerator yes to more and better recycling. We need EXTENSIVE studies that can prove somehow this is not harmful before going ahead.

-- Lorraine Sayer, Clarington

I do not think that the incinerator should be built here. It is an expensive, short sighted, stopgap measure which will prevent more responsible reduction and diversion waste management tactics. I am also very concerned about the health and environmental effects of the emissions as a large portion of our waste stream is plastics, which are known to degrade into toxic compounds. I and many other people I know will move if this comes to pass.

- Jessica Welsh, Clarington

NO NO NO - it is just wrong wrong wrong - reduce reuse recycle and compost!!!!!!

-- Terry Howell, Oshawa

Durham should not build an incinerator. This is a moral issue. We cannot continue to use up the Earth's resources and burn the evidence. A ridiculously expensive incinerator will thwart efforts to divert waste because it must burn 24-7. I want our region to be the leader in developing sustainable practices. This will be a challenge but the people of this region are up to it. Burning resources is harmful to our future.

-- KathieBracken, Oshawa

No. Incineration has too many risks and so close to schools is scary. Maybe Pickering Regional councillors Rick Johnson and Bonnie Littley would consider an incinerator for the Prestige Seaton Employment Lands. There’s no people there and no reason for other industry to move there unless it is to be away from people.

 -- Ken Nash, Pickering

I do not believe for one second that the residents of Clarington approved the incineration project. I do not want Toronto’s garbage or their pollution floating around in our air for our kids to grow up in. Had Clarington residents been properly asked and notified of the possibility of installing an incinerator the answer obviously would have been ‘no’.

-- T. Miller, Clarington

 I think it’s unfortunate that the incinerator was forced on Durham and in particular Courtice. This began as a joint York-Durham project. It makes more economic sense to then build it in York for many reasons, including cost: we will inherit Toronto’s garbage once the Michigan agreement expires in the next couple years; York is twice the size of Durham’s population, therefore has twice the garbage; the number of trucks travelling from York to Durham will be double versus that of the reverse. Sending garbage from Durham to York would cut down on travel and environmental costs due to the volume; and, Toronto and York collectively will be sending their large garbage to a smaller municipality (Durham). The incineration method itself is not fully proven either. Geographically speaking, building it in Courtice is in no way cost effective or even environmentally friendly. It should have been built in York for all practical reasons.

 -- John Malish, Oshawa

No incinerator to Clarington. How does a joint project between Durham and York regions become an 88/12 split project costs? Besides, if it was a fair project, both the Courtice and East Gwillimbury sites would be on the final list. That way one site from both regions makes it fair. If East Gwillimbury’s unwillingness to accept an incinerator is accepted by the council, then Clarington should be doing the same thing while they still can.

-- Christine Jackson, Clarington

 When I am ill I go to see my physician for advice. When my engine in my car fails I take it to a mechanic to repair. With a project as large as this incinerator, why are we taxpayers allowing the uninformed, uneducated and non-elected to make decisions that will pollute our air, contaminate our water and destroy our land? I say a vote of NO-CONFIDENCE in this council and re-elect a new one!

-- K.M. Smegal, Clarington

 No they shouldn’t build an incinerator in Courtice! We already are getting exposed too much in such a concentrated area! Two more nukes are getting installed, GM pollution, Hwy. 401, Goodyear Tire, Doms Auto and the soon-to-be expanision of Hwy. 407. Why don’t they do the environmental study after this expansion has gone through! The whole world is turning green, but not Clarington! Its a good thing we are all so close to a new cancer centre because the Clarington residents will be using it!

-- Bonnie Parisien, Clarington

 I am concerned that the incinerator project is a quick fix for an ongoing problem. We know that an incinerator is like a hungry beast that must be fed, and if not enough garbage is available goods that could be recycled could find their way into “the mouth.” Either that or we will make deals with other municipalities to take their garbage and end up burning more toxic materials. It makes much more sense to develop and implement a recycling plan that we can use to teach our children about responsible living.

-- Maureen Dingman,  Clarington

 No incinerator should be built in Clarington, or anywhere else for that matter. Air quality issues and human health issues are no trade-off to (SUPPOSEDLY) solving our trash issues. Trash issues must be solved by further educating the public on recycling, reusing, reducing and refusing products which are unfriendly to the environment or packaged unnecessarily.

-- Doug Hart, Clarington

I do not support the incinerator project planned for Clarington. I am a young adult planning to start a family soon, and am very concerned about the toxins this incinerator will spew into the air. There has not been enough talk about the energy-from-waste factor, which makes me think that that is not one of the main goals of the project when it should be. Also, how do I know that all my recycling etc. won’t also be burned...? Can you guarantee that it will be sorted properly so that only non-toxic materials will be burned? I don’t agree with burning our garbage when we should be focusing on reduction and reusing materials. If we educate the population and teach reduction and reuse, incineration should not be a factor.

 -- Dan Reiff,  Oshawa

 An incinerator will cost the taxpayer, will be a disincentive to waste diversion programs and has not been proven to be safe for the surrounding environment or population.

-- Mary Anne Martin, Clarington

YES. Clean burn technology has been used for many years. The people should consider the reason it is needed. Next time you put your recycling and green bin as well as your garbage out, check to see if your neighbours are so diligent. As I leave for work on garbage day I see few recycling and green bins out there. Why? How hard can it be? Oh, I know why, they are all too busy attending the STOP THE INCINERATOR information sessions and have forgotten to RECYCLE!!! Nobody wants garbage in their neighbourhood. So why hasn’t the municipality made recycling MANDATORY? Why I ask you??? Make it LAW. Get on your neighbours’ backs and ask where the recycling bin is? The green bin??? If you are so against it, do something about it. Be PRO-ACTIVE. REDUCE, RE-USE AND FOR PETE’S SAKE RECYCLE IT.

-- Andrew Cieslik, Clarington

Incinerators reduce the volume of the original waste by 95 to 96 per cent, depending upon composition and degree of recovery of materials such as metals from the ash for recycling. This means that while incineration does not completely replace landfilling, it reduces the necessary volume for disposal significantly. With the borders closing to our waste, at least Durham Council is considering alternatives. The most publicized concerns from environmentalists about the incineration of municipal solid wastes (MSW) involve the fear that it produces significant amounts of dioxin and furan emissions. Dioxins and furans are considered by many to be serious health hazards. Older generation incinerators that were not equipped with adequate gas-cleaning technologies were indeed significant sources of dioxin emissions. Today, however, due to advances in emission control designs and stringent new governmental regulations, incinerators emit virtually no dioxins. Studies demonstrate that the emissions from just one family using a burn barrel produce more emissions than an incineration plant disposing of 200 tonnes of waste per day.

-- Scott Templeton, Whitby

The answer to this question requires positive answers to other questions. First, can state-of-the-art technology be operated without making new pollution? Second, can this project operate at a profit to Durham Region by selling electricity produced from the generated heat and from being paid to dispose of nearby regions’ waste, ie. Toronto, Port Hope, Cobourg, etc.? Has the Region of Durham gotten engineering proposals which document the calculations to support the above contentions that this is an economic non-polluting project? If the above are true then I support this proposal, but show us the details. Where are there comparable operating facilities to substantiate these claims? It is now time for Show and Tell!

-- James McGillawee, Oshawa

I hope this project is built and I hope I can be one of the people who might get a job working at this facility. Why does Oshawa continually stop any large business that will employ large numbers of people and other revenue sources from coming to the area?

-- Earl A. Robinson, Oshawa