Re: “Burning sludge likely, official says,” Nov. 1.
I find it incomprehensible that the Capital Regional District would reconsider the land application of sewage sludge. If sewage is not suitable for disposal into the marine environment, why on earth would it be acceptable for dispersal on land?
It was clear at the recent CRD meeting that the driving force behind this decision was the economic interests of potential corporations bidding on the waste-to-energy project and not the wellbeing of the environment and society. There is money to be had in land application of sludge.
I also take exception to the threat that an extra $38 million will be needed to incinerate the sludge if we do not proceed with land application. If the sludge is processed directly by a gasification plant, the equivalent amount of energy will be generated through an anaerobic digester and incinerator plant but with less of an environmental impact. This would save about $250 million by eliminating the anaerobic digester.
Gasification is not incineration; organic waste is heated in a low-oxygen environment and this breaks down the compounds into hydrogen, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and some methane. This gas can be burned to drive the process or generate electricity; it can also be converted into liquid hydrocarbons. The greenhouse-gas footprint is almost half that of incineration. It is the best solution for dealing with our sludge.
Filippo Ferri
Esquimalt
