Author:
Ned Depew
[ Edit | View ]
|
Date Posted: 18:41:29 08/28/05 Sun
The tires at the CT burn plant are incinerated in a specifically designed and dedicated tire incineration facility, located on the CT shore, several miles upwind of the nearest landmass (the relatively sparsely populated eastern Long Island), where most of the emissions blow harmlessly out to sea. That is the fact.
TDF does NOT burn cleaner in a cement kiln than in a dedicated TDF incineration facility. That is simply not the truth, and you will not find a single scientific study that backs up that ridiculous claim. I can't imagine where you get all your mis-information, Gene, but you certainly seem to have an endless supply.
Please do us all the honor of posting the address where we can go and see for ourselves scientific proof of your claim.
If you want to know where I get my information, one source is the 1988 paper "Domestic Markets for California's Used and Waste Tires," by Seymour I. Schwartz, Professor of Environmental Science and Policy at the University of California at Davis.
He ran tests at four separate cement kiln facilities burning tire scrap (which burns more completely and cleaner than the whole tires Lafarge proposes to burn). His results, which are widely available, found that "dioxin and furans increases of between 53% and 100% in four tests; polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) increased in three tests (between 296% and 2,230%) but decreased by 68% in a fourth test; lead emissions increased in three tests, by 59%, 388%, and 475%, and decreased in one test by 94%; hexavalent chromium increased in one test by 727%, and decreased in two tests by 36% and 87%"
These figures indicate clear increases - sometimes garganutan increases - in some of the most deadly pollutants known to man - and at best, inconsistant results compared to predictions. While tire-burning does reduce some of the less dangerous pollutants released by coal or oil burning, it increases emissions of many much more dangerous chemicals.
If you had any interest in finding out the facts, you could have found this information for your self. Among other places, it is available at: West Virginia Envionmental Council
.
I challenge you to produce the smallest shred of support for your statement, based on scientific fact - and don't try to use that silly "less total pounds of pollution" argument, that compares reductions of relatively benign emissions like SoX with increases in the release of deadly toxins like dioxin and furans.
That is a silly "apples and oranges" argument meant to confuse the public. You may fall for it, but no one with an iota of scientific understanding would be taken in. The truth is, I present the facts, and the sources of those facts so that others can read them first hand and make up their own minds.
You make statements that you can't back up. That's what I call "twisting."
|
Feedback: 