Solid Waste opportunities

Since it learned almost a decade ago that the Keele Street landfill in Vaughan was reaching capacity, the City of Toronto has avoided any hard and fast decisions about what to do about its solid waste. It signed an agreement to ship it to Michigan, but now, after several years of threats of closure from Michigan authorities, an agreement has been reached with provincial authorities that by 2010 this option will be closed. The city can no longer put off making decisions about what to do with solid waste.

Here's an action strategy:

1. The city must, as a first priority, secure a landfill site in Southern Ontario for its solid waste. Whatever other action the city wishes to take, a landfill site within the city’s long-term control (rental or ownership), and under the city’s operation (not privately operated) is a necessity.

In late September, City Council endorsed a proposal to purchase a landfill site near London, Ontario. This may be the site needed, but since the city has refused to make public the terms of the contract, it is impossible to know whether this arrangement should be supported. In principle, the acquisition of a land fill site in Southern Ontario is good: but the detail is important to know before signing on.

2. The city should ensure this solid waste site is the most environmentally advanced landfill site possible. The city should be able to make the case that this land fill is not a blight on the landscape, but is a benefit.

3. Once the new landfill site is underway, the city can then create strategies for reducing solid waste, as well as other methods of dealing with it. In all cases, it is very important to talk clearly and directly about costs and benefits, since the alternatives to land fill are often much more expensive. With this in mind, the city consider the following possibilities: 

 a) create viable policies to ensure that companies which produce  durable goods agree to taken them back and re-process them when they are no longer wanted. One carpet company already guarantees that it will take back old carpet, and it has a plan to reuse all parts of the old carpet. Other companies should be encouraged to be as progressive;

b) take steps to reduce the amount of disposable packaging;

c) increase opportunities for composting, particularly in multi-residential and non-residential buildings, and find new markets for compost;

d) consider whether incineration is appropriate, particularly since the incinerators in use in Europe seem so promising, with emissions creating cleaner air than exists in cities. However, the costs of incineration appear to be about double the cost of land fill, even after accounting for any revenue gained from selling electricity produced by incineration.