Education, My Dear Watson

Here at Better BTU, we’ve said that instead of carrying the financial burden of jumpstarting the clean energy industry, one of the best things the U.S. government can do is promote the benefits of the waste-to-energy process through education. And it looks like our friends across the pond are trying to relay the same message.

BPF Director General Peter Davis

Director General of British Plastics Federation Peter Davis called on the government to “get off the fence” in a published letter to The Times on Apr. 11. His message came in response to an article by John Simpson two days earlier that claimed “millionaires and local activists have joined forces across Britan to fight proposals for scores of huge incinerators.”

The fundamental catalyst for change is education and we think it’s an excellent starting point for the British and U.S. governments. Just as Sherlock Holmes would boil things down to the most elementary level to solve his cases, educating the public on the basic facts of our environmental situation and the waste-to-energy process will stop the frenzied protests that often break out at the word ‘incinerator.’

 As we discussed in an earlier blog post, San Jose has taken on an ambitious initiative to radically reduce its carbon footprint. While the city’s success in diverting trash from landfills and creating green jobs is impressive, perhaps more important is the success it has had in educating the public on WHY the changes are necessary, resulting in an active and supportive community. (See: San Jose Sets the Emerald Standard for Green Cities).

Statue of Sherlock Holmes

Davis reinforces this point when he calls on the local councils to “consult in depth on proposals so as to ensure the whole community understands the benefits, rather than just engage with head-in-the-sand local groups.”

Waste-to-energy (or energy for waste as it is referred to in the UK) technology has made substantial progress over the past 30 years.  Studies by both government and independent entities have proved that today’s processes, whether incineration, gasification or anaerobic digestion, are clean and effective without releasing harmful emissions or endangering the health of the surrounding communities. Davis even uses Denmark an example to show that “higher recycling rates are not negatively affected by increased energy from waste.”

Of course there will always be a small percent of people who will never be convinced, no matter how much factual evidence is presented (hey, we still have folks that think the lunar landing was staged!) But by educating the greater community with updated information on waste-to-energy processes, it will reduce the effect of radicals showing decades-old images of incinerators spewing black smoke from its stacks.  Our advice to government: get off the fence and get in the game!

Further Reading:

BPF Slams Government Over Lack of Support For 'Energy From Waste' – Plastics & Rubber Weekly, Apr. 11, 2012

Consulted and Ignored: Council Takes Legal Action Over Incinerator – The Times, Apr. 9, 2012

EFW Hindered by Lack of Incentives – Packaging News, Apr. 24, 2012

Déjà vu: No Time for the Timid

This anecdote was shared by one of our members after his time at the West Coast Waste Conversion Congress:

A little over nine years ago, I was attending a conference sponsored by a genset company to gather information for a cow manure project I was considering. The presenter gave a great talk on his manure-to-digester gas project and I raced up to speak with him afterwards.

Eagerly shoving my card in his face, I told him that I had a similar project in the works and asked him if he would consider partnering with me.

“No,” was his flat response.

Stunned, all I could utter was “Why not?!”

“I’ve done one of these in my lifetime,” the presenter responded. “I have no reason to do two.”

He went on to describe all the financial and technical hurdles he had to overcome to see his project to fruition. Hearing him recount the many roadblocks he hit discouraged me and I later dropped the project, advising my clients that anaerobic digestion for animal waste-to-energy just wasn’t viable.

Needless to say, I missed that train. Anaerobic digestion is now a well-accepted practice and many people have made tidy profits off of projects relating to it.

I reflected on this as the West Coast Energy Conversion Congress came to a close. The conference perfectly illustrated the fact that we are still in the early days of gasification technology, giving me a strong sense of déjà vu to my time studying anaerobic digestion. Similar to then, the older technology (in this case, mass burn incinerators) has fallen out of favor and, although newer technologies with lower price points and cleaner emissions are on the horizon, they haven’t arrived yet.

But the real take-away lesson from the conference is that there are enough green technology advancements in the works, as well as plenty of brave developers trying to bring the projects to fruition. The sheer number of developers suggests that while many will fail, several will make it through to commercial and environmental viability. And I won’t scare so easy this time!

The above story is a perfect example of why Better BTU came into being. Our industry is growing and changing so fast and we feel that there isn’t a central place for communication on ideas, technologies and projects that work, don’t work, etc. That’s what we’ve come to be about: sharing information and working towards a greener future!