A recent investigative report by the New York Times on Delhi’s Waste-To-Energy (WTE) incinerators, analysed 150 air and soil samples gathered over a five-year period, from 2019 to 2023. The lead and arsenic-laced smoke and ash that contained as many as eight times the permissible levels of heavy metals such as cadmium has been a damning indictment of the capital’s WTE scene. In the capital city where people are already struggling to breathe, the impact of such actions can best be described as disastrous.
In June 2024, the Tamil Nadu government released the first Climate Action Plan for Chennai (CCAP) charting out pathways to achieve carbon neutrality in the city by 2050, which is two decades ahead of the national vision. The report rightly points out that improper management of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) is the third biggest contributor to carbon emissions in the city. Therefore, the proposal to set up a Waste-to Energy (WTE) plant in Kodungaiyur (in Chennai) to burn about 2,100 tons of garbage per day, on the hooves of these analyses and recommendations, comes as something of a disappointment, even shock.
Chennai’s health and Waste-to-Energy: prevention better than cure
A WTE incinerator is essentially a massive material destructor, which, on burning its feed, releases a litany of pollutants — inorganic substances (such as carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, sulphur oxides, nitrogen oxides, silicates, inorganic ash, soot, metal and metalloids, including cadmium, cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, antimony, arsenic) ; organic substances (volatile organic compounds, hydrocarbons, dioxins, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons); and particulate matter. The health impacts of WTE incineration are therefore an amalgamation of all the above toxins, and include respiratory problems, asthma, headaches, skin ailments, cancer, kidney diseases, Parkinson’s, cardiovascular disease, nervous disorders and diabetes among others.
The particular vulnerability of children and pregnant women to these toxins is well documented with a study near the Okhla WTE plant finding that children there were likely to have lower lung function and lower IQs. Pregnant women were advised not to live in the area due to risks to the growing foetus.
The health risks posed by incineration are not limited to just the actual process of burning matter. They begin as early as the waste hauling process (imagine the chronic exposure of host communities to heavy-duty trucks that constantly ply neighbourhood roads), continuing right through to the removal of the incinerator’s by-products (bottom ash, fly ash, boiler ash and other residues). While the ash must be properly treated and disposed of in hazardous waste landfills to minimise its environmental and health impacts, it is not unusual to find toxic ash just dumped in neighbourhoods (as reported by the New York Times study) or in planned moves, used as road and construction material or food production, reintroducing the toxins into the environment and our bodies, via the food chain.
Watch | What is incineration?
The 80:20 rule
Incineration is being touted as a quick fix for Chennai’s waste mountains. Our woes, though, arise not from the decades-old dumpyards that we want gone, but the glaring inefficiencies throughout the waste system that feed these mountains of waste.
The CCAP report notes that, of the total Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) that Chennai collects, it processes only 20% and dumps the remaining 80% in dumpsites. The loopholes in the waste transportation system have been cited as a major reason behind the low processing of solid waste in the city. For example, the concessionaire for Solid Waste Management (SWM) in Greater Chennai Corporation (GCC) provides end-to-end services including collection, transportation, and cleanliness for the city, as well as dealing with priority services, special services, and citizen complaints etc. However, even key performance indicators (KPI) for the waste management contractors are not adequately defined by the GCC. Thus, one of the KPIs counts mere transportation of waste to a dumpsite as satisfactory performance. As a result, 4,168 tons per day (TPD) of garbage collected in the GCC are delivered to the dumpyard and the concessionaire is also paid for it. According to the CCAP report, even though Chennai has a processing capacity of 2,460 TPD including composting, bio-methanation and Material Recovery Facilities (MRF), it processes only 637 tons in these facilities. It has an abysmally low capacity utilisation of just 26% . The report further says: “There is an urgent need to guarantee that collected waste is delivered to processing facilities rather than dumpsites.”
While the waste management in Chennai has gone hi-tech with a range of digital features such GPS tracking, remote monitoring, and mobile apps that supposedly enable an easy complaint system, together with spot-fining, what it lacks is an inclusivity of the people whose lives are intricately tied to waste management. Honest data gathering, and sound practices that look at glaring problems in the eye, and find inclusive solutions are the need of the hour.
Lessons from Delhi
Delhi has four WTE incineration plants that together burn about 7,250 tons of garbage, with nearly one-third of this coming out as bottom ash and fly ash. Both pollutants are currently dumped at three landfill sites in Delhi, contaminating the soil, air and underground water. Large parts of Chennai are already victims to ashes being released from its thermal powerplants. Adding hazardous ash from the proposed WTE plant into the mix will only worsen the health woes of the city, with local residents being disproportionately impacted.
Studies indicate that the WTE plants in Delhi have contributed significantly to Delhi’s air pollution. The National Green Tribunal’s fine of ₹25 lakh in 2017, on the Okhla WTE incinerator for releasing dioxins and furans nine times higher than the permissible limits and violating other pollution parameters points to the reality of operating WTE incinerators. Furthermore, the Delhi Pollution Control Committee (DPCC) slapped a fine of ₹5 lakh on each of these plants in 2021. According to a peer-reviewed article published in Nature Geoscience, the burning of waste containing plastic caused some 50% reduced visibility and impacted human health in Delhi. As a result, citizens living in Delhi breathe the worst air in the world and lose about 12 years of life expectancy to air pollution. It is imperative that Chennai learns from Delhi’s deadly mistakes on waste management.
The climate change connection
Climate change refers to long-term shifts in temperatures and weather patterns. Human activities have been the main drivers of climate change, primarily due to the burning of fossil fuels (like coal, oil, and gas), which produces heat-trapping gases such as carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), methane (CH4), etc. Of these gases, CO2 has contributed more than any other driver, to climate change. Burning one tonne of garbage in a WTE incinerator emits up to 1,700 kg of CO2 emissions. The proposed WTE in Kodungaiyur will burn about 2,100 tonnes of mixed garbage per day or about 33% of the total garbage generation in Chennai to emit about 3,570 tonnes of CO2 per day which is equivalent to the emissions from about 8,92,000 cars. This, according to 2021 figures, will be equivalent to 35% of emission from cars in Tamil Nadu. The power generated will be a meagre 31 MW or 0.16% of Tamil Nadu’s power requirement at an exorbitant ₹ 7 per unit according to the tender documents.
The CCAP report clearly says : “One of the major strategies for climate change mitigation is shifting Chennai’s waste management strategy from the waste-to-energy model towards recycling.” This begs the question as to why we are deviating from scientific recommendations.
The WTE Chain Reaction
The WTE incineration plant proposed in Chennai will release about 1,15,50,000 cubic metres of flue gas at a temperature range of about 140-200 degrees Celsius every day. This is likely to have huge ramifications on the surrounding area’s temperature leading to “urban heat islands”, which in turn will increase energy consumption (e.g., for air conditioning), while also exacerbating heat-related illnesses in people.
It must be noted that, in Chennai, the Kodungaiyur area where the WTE incinerator is proposed, already has the second-highest land surface temperature of 42°C, compared to just 28.5°C in Pallikaranai. All the other efforts taken by the government to make Chennai “carbon neutral” such as electrification of transport, making energy-efficient buildings, reducing air pollution, reducing temperatures, etc. will be wasted, as 2,100 tonnes of mixed garbage burning every day will neutralise any efforts to bring down carbon emissions in the city. Paradoxically, what goes around as waste in a WTE incineration plant will come around as pollutants, and toxins that harm human health, livelihoods and the environment.
The CCAP report notes that of the total Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) that Chennai collects, it processes only 20% and dumps the remaining 80% in dumpsites. File photograph
| Photo Credit:
VELANKANNI RAJ B
Public cash for burning trash?
For the Tehkhand WTE plant in Delhi, the South Delhi Municipal Corporation (SDMC) Commissioner stated that the Union government would provide ₹122.38 crore under the Swachh Bharat Mission, while the Power Ministry would contribute ₹52.66 crore to the project’s development. The balance will be raised by the Corporation in partnership with the nominated bidder. The SDMC also promised the project bidder ₹125 crore in financial support in its request for proposal (RfP). What this means is that public funds will be used to pay about ₹300 crore or 80% of the WTE incineration plant costs, which is worth ₹375 crore.
An assessment of Chennai Corporation’s Solid Waste Management (SWM) budget by Citizen Consumer and Civic Action Group (CAG) in 2018, revealed some startling figures. The per capita SWM expenditure of Chennai’s centralised model of waste management was ₹1,388 compared to just ₹783 of Mysore which follows door-to-door collection and 80% segregation of waste at source for decentralised waste treatment. A decentralised approach towards waste management involves the management of about 2-20 tonnes of waste in Integrated Material Recovery Facilities (IMRF). This approach is not only evidently cheaper but also improves the lives of waste-pickers, and promotes recycling, while reducing GHG emissions.
On the other hand, centralised WTE plants are infamous for having extremely high operation and maintenance costs which contribute to the high prices for power generated by them. Chennai’s garbage is predominantly mixed waste which has a high moisture content, and therefore low-calorific value, making it unsuitable for energy generation. Given these factors, the WTE will only further strain the Corporation’s budget, and raise the cost of waste management in Chennai, apart from the other inevitable consequences of health and climate disasters.
The power of decentralised waste management
The CCAP report has clearly laid out the path towards decarbonisation by stressing the need to adopt source segregation and decentralised waste processing systems instead of centralised WTE plants. This alone will contribute to a 90% reduction in GHG emissions from waste by 2050. The recent CSIR-NEERI report submitted to the National Green Tribunal highlights the public health issues related to burning of garbage in WTE incinerators and also states that it goes against the principles of circularity and the Solid Waste Management Rules, 2016. Chennai is currently overly focused on End of Pipe (EOP) technologies/solutions such as WTE incineration, whereas today’s waste crises necessitates structural transformations, including capping the production of non-essential plastics, lower consumption, source segregation and decentralised processing. The message is startling, yet so simple: Chennai cannot burn its way out of its garbage crisis.
Afroz Khan is a researcher with Citizen consumer and civic Action group (CAG), His role includes creating audio visual material to heighten awareness in the public domain, on environmental, public health, and governance issues.
Chythenyen Devika Kulasekaran is associated with the Centre for Financial Accountability and works on the post consumption impacts of plastics with a focus on Waste to Energy incineration.
Geo Damin is an environmental writer volunteering with Poovulagin Nanbargal for the past 9 years and working in the space of climate justice and waste management.
Vishvaja Sambath is a co-founder and volunteer with Chennai Climate Action Group and works on air pollution, climate change and public health.
Published – November 25, 2024 05:00 pm IST
