Sir, - I was dismayed to read (The Irish Times, October 21st) that it is your belief that incineration should form part of the best approach to Dublin's growing waste crisis. NIMABY (Not In My/Any Back Yard) will be seen to be alive and kicking if any plans for incineration are attempted.
On first appearance incineration seems like an answer to the waste problem - just like nuclear energy seemed like the answer to the energy problem. Make the waste disappear and create energy at the same time - brilliant. It doesn't make the waste disappear. Burning waste creates ash of about a quarter the original volume of waste. This has to be disposed of in landfills. Probably the biggest health threat from incinerators and the factor which encourages people to oppose them most is the release of dioxins (known carcinogens) from them.
The best way to deal with Dublin's waste is first and foremost - reduction. This puts a huge onus on producers and the packaging industry. If you reduce the waste there should not be a supply for an incinerator. After that, re-use and recycle (what happened to the glass milk bottle which is still widely used in the UK). Five years ago, Dr Paul Connett, a world authority on waste management, addressing Dublin City Council said "incineration is a sophisticated answer to the wrong question .. . the real task is not to dispose of the waste; it is to find ways of unmaking it." Building incinerators removes any incentive to reduce waste. - Yours, etc., Peter Keane,
Blackrock,
Co Dublin.