Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: SC, because we will take your sh*t...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Wateree, South Carolina
    Posts
    48,810

    Default SC, because we will take your sh*t...

    South Carolina once took the nation’s waste. A new plan could open the flow again
    BY SAMMY FRETWELL


    In a state once known for taking the nation’s waste, plans that could pave the way for huge new garbage incinerators got a chilly response from lawmakers after they were told Wednesday the proposal could spark an influx of out-of-state trash to South Carolina.

    The proposal would sharply increase the amount of garbage that could be burned in waste incinerators, potentially making South Carolina more attractive for development of new trash burning operations that need waste from other states.

    The bill, however, raised so many concerns during a legislative hearing Wednesday afternoon that lawmakers took steps to slow momentum for burning garbage in South Carolina. A House subcommittee agreed to amend the bill and adjourn debate, a move that damages chances the legislation will pass this year.

    At issue is a proposal by a contingent of York County lawmakers, who introduced a bill Jan. 27 to increase the amount of waste that incinerators could burn. They said the plan could eventually reduce the state’s reliance on landfills.

    The bill also makes it easier to melt plastics with less environmental oversight, a measure that could lead to mounds of plastic waste, some of which could come from other states, critics said.

    Easing restrictions on burning and melting waste didn’t go over well with South Carolina’s major environmental groups this week. Upstate Forever, the Conservation Voters of South Carolina and the S.C. Coastal Conservation League sent out a flurry of emails decrying the legislation, and representatives from each organization spoke at Wednesday’s hearing in Columbia.

    “We think we need to say no to this,’’ the Conservation Voters director, John Tynan, said of burning garbage. “It’s a dangerous industry that is not going to do anything but move someone else’s problem to our state.’’

    According to the House bill, the capacity limit on burning waste would rise from the current 600 tons per day to 5,000 tons per day.

    Consultant Art Braswell, who formerly ran the Department of Health and Environmental Control’s solid waste division, told The State that the existing 600-ton limit doesn’t make waste incineration profitable in South Carolina.

    An increase to 5,000 tons could make the state attractive for waste-burning companies to move in, but they would need out-of-state waste because South Carolina doesn’t produce enough, he said.

    “To me, you’d have to import waste to get that amount of waste into an incinerator,’’ Braswell said, noting there are currently no municipal garbage burning incinerators in the state.

    Rep. Raye Felder, a York County Republican who supports the bill, said the idea was to take pressure off South Carolina to develop more landfills, while getting rid of plastic bags, bottles and other synthetic materials that are choking the state.

    Incinerators could be used to make power, as well, she said.

    “If we could incinerate the trash, produce energy and have a much smaller by-product to have to dispose of, we can get ahead of this,’’ Felder said. She said landfills take up space and leak pollution into groundwater.

    Felder said the state could take steps to limit out-of-state waste, such as charging expensive disposal fees for non-South Carolina garbage. But that could be an issue because court rulings in the past have limited attempts in South Carolina to halt the flow of waste from other states, critics say.

    Committee members didn’t share Felder’s enthusiasm for the bill.

    “It sounds like people are ready to come and build major incinerators in our state, with materials possibly from out of state,’’ Rep. Shedron Williams, D-Hampton, said. “This is a lot of tonnage, from a 600 to 5,000 per day limit. That’s a lot of stuff.’’

    Wednesday’s vote by the House agriculture subcommittee took out the section of the bill that would have allowed for an increase in waste to be burned in incinerators.

    But while the decision dims chances the bill will pass this year, the waste industry has in the past had success with lawmakers, bringing in teams of lobbyists who persuaded lawmakers to see it their way. Even if the bill does not pass this year, it would remain alive for consideration in 2022.

    At one point, South Carolina was home to an array of fully operating waste facilities that took various types of garbage from across the country. Those included a hazardous waste landfill near Sumter, a medical waste incinerator in Hampton County and hazardous waste incinerators in Spartanburg and York counties.

    All of those facilities have closed to the nation in the past 30 years, in some cases leaving the state with substantial cleanup bills. A nuclear waste landfill in Barnwell County is still in operation, but it no longer takes waste from across the country. A towering garbage dump in Lee County also is still operating and is a major importer of garbage from other states, most notably North Carolina and New York.

    Tynan said the plastic melting portion of the bill has been subject to debate in the Legislature for years. It limits state oversight of waste that would be used in the plant.

    That’s a concern because easing restrictions could make it easier to stockpile mounds of plastic, creating a hazard like one in the Beaufort area several years ago. And without state oversight, companies would not have to set aside money to cleanup plastics pollution, environmentalists said.

    Tynan and Shelley Robbins, who tracks legislative issues for Upstate Forever, said South Carolina has more than ample landfill space and doesn’t need incinerators.

    “We are not yet at a capacity stress point,’’ Robbins said. “We are fine.’’

    Robbins said trash burners release air pollution that South Carolina shouldn’t have to deal with. Robbins, who has been researching the environmental impacts of incinerators, said she’s run across one plant in southern New Jersey that is among the area’s leading sources of air pollution.

    The American Chemistry Council supports the plastic melting portion of the bill., which is companion legislation to a similar Senate bill. But it remained unclear this week if a major waste company was behind the part of the legislation to allow for expanded trash incineration.

    Covanta, which operates incinerators across the country, tried to open an incinerator in Chester County about 10 years ago, but efforts to accommodate the company failed at the time in the Legislature after an outcry from environmental groups.

    A Covanta spokesman told The State the company has no interest in opening an incinerator in South Carolina.

    “We have not been involved at all with that legislation,’’ spokesman James Regan said. “We have no development plans in South Carolina.’’


    Felder attributed her interest to a constituent who has conducted extensive research on waste incineration plants around the world.

    That constituent, Chet Miller, is a retired aerospace engineer who has volunteered his time to help York County examine waste disposal issues.

    He and Felder said South Carolina landfills are full of nasty, disease-ridden refuse that doesn’t break down easily. Such refuse could be more easily disposed of through waste burning operations, Felder said.

    “You take a block of plastic diapers; it’s as heavy as a cinder block,’’ Felder said. “We are throwing that into a landfill. These plastic diapers do not disintegrate. They are here for years.’’

    https://www.thestate.com/news/local/...pdigest_latest

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    ******* County, NC.
    Posts
    5,913

    Default

    SC already takes all the out of state trash from Ohio and New Jersey and few others.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2017
    Posts
    1,143

    Default

    With all the migrating yankees we receive,its wasnt going to be too long before they bring their trash with them.To hell with all them New Jersey and New Yorkers.I rather have people from Ohio move here before I accept them gangbanging assholes from up there.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Large part of dhec’s funding come from air fees, which are generated from..... pollutants emitted from industry. SC criteria pollutant emissions have decreased year over year for a while now to the point that dhec is concerned that the funding from emissions will be insufficient in a couple of years. More burning = more money for the environmental watch dogs.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Sullivan\'s Island
    Posts
    12,865

    Default

    I'd need to do some research before I could offer a reasonable response to his thread but I can't help but believe incineration is a valid away to reduce garbage. Landfills are pretty much throwing a tarp over the problem. Whatever you bury can leak into the groundwater and some stuff lasts a very, very long time before it even starts to decompose. Burning it might very well be the best of the various bad solutions.

    Burning it on the East coast of the continent might be the best place to do it. As I have heard it phrased "The solution to pollution is dilution." If we burn it with a predominant west wind and let the effluent blow out over the Atlantic, it disperses over a wide, unpopulated area. I'm not saying we should be taking in other states' garbage but burning it might be warranted, and if we do, burning it on the leeward side of the continent might be the best idea. SC already has a warning about eating fresh water fish due to high mercury levels caused mostly by the air-borne contaminants of coal burning in power and cement plants. We need to figure out how to reduce it and/or a way to disperse our toxic waste over a wide area. We need to make sure every state is doing their share of proper waste disposal. The fact that we are on the leeward edge of the continent might give us some leverage to send some of our non-burnable waste to other states to bury, like nuclear plant left-overs, etc.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    24,411

    Default

    When you ride down I-20 near Bishopville, that breath taking stink is Long Island, NY's garbage.

    Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    FROG LEVEL
    Posts
    23,785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catdaddy View Post
    When you ride down I-20 near Bishopville, that breath taking stink is Long Island, NY's garbage.

    Sent from my moto z4 using Tapatalk
    Heard it is a Mountain of trash
    Gettin old is for pussies! AND MY NEW TRUE people say like Capt. Tom >>>>>>>>>/
    "Wow, often imitated but never duplicated. No one can do it like the master. My hat is off to you DRDUCK!"

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Forest Acres
    Posts
    10,214

    Default

    Mountains of trash are in Richland county too
    It's not enough to simply tolerate the 2nd Amendment as an antiquated inconvenience. Caring for the 2nd Amendment means fighting to restore long lost rights.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    FROG LEVEL
    Posts
    23,785

    Default

    And coming to a town near you!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Gettin old is for pussies! AND MY NEW TRUE people say like Capt. Tom >>>>>>>>>/
    "Wow, often imitated but never duplicated. No one can do it like the master. My hat is off to you DRDUCK!"

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •