Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (14 May) . . Page.. 1422 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

I am sure that the residents of Gungahlin and North Canberra and the workers in Mitchell would be very interested to know exactly what is coming out of the Totalcare chimney. In fact, I have had a number of phone calls from such residents and workers in Mitchell to find out what exactly is going on with this issue.

This incident brought to light the fact that there is no physical monitoring by the Environment Protection Service of emissions from the incinerator stack. The only ongoing report received by the EPS from Totalcare is of the operating temperature. Totalcare keeps a waste manifest system only on a voluntary basis, and there is no linking of operating temperature at a particular time with the type of waste disposed of at that time. That is a very critical issue.

Mr Humphries: There is now.

MS HORODNY: I am glad that there is now; but there was not at the time. The EPS assumes that the environmental safety of the incinerator is proven on the basis of the design of the unit. We heard over and over again from people at Totalcare that it works because it has been designed to work; therefore, it must work. That is an argument that does not actually wash. This approach is very risky, because it does not take into account the fact that operational difficulties can arise over time with any incinerator and that sometimes the incinerator may not be operating at optimal temperatures. The operating temperature of the incinerator is the critical issue. If the temperature drops too far below 1,000 degrees, then there is incomplete combustion of the waste and the potential to produce such toxic chemicals as dioxin.

I am very concerned that the Totalcare incinerator could become the hazardous waste disposal centre for south-east Australia. Medical waste from New South Wales and Victoria is regularly being transported to Mitchell for disposal. There is a basic waste management principle, however - that the producer of waste should take responsibility for its disposal. This provides waste producers with an incentive to reduce the amount of waste they generate. Totalcare is willingly providing producers of medical and other hazardous waste in other States with an easy way of disposing of this waste. These producers should work out their own ways of dealing with their own waste, and not send it here. Also, there is no national procedure in place yet for tracking hazardous waste, although some individual States have developed their own waste manifest systems. Unfortunately, the ACT does not have a mandatory hazardous waste manifest system; so, there is no guarantee that we really know what hazardous waste is being generated in the ACT and how it is being disposed of.

There is some confusion within the Government about what Totalcare's interests are in disposing of pesticides. Mr Humphries has maintained that the incineration of pesticides is part of Totalcare's core business, yet the managing director of Totalcare recently told environment groups - in fact, on 30 April - that pesticide incineration is not part of its core business and never has been. He said that no further pesticides or agricultural chemicals will be incinerated. I think the community deserves to know exactly what is the Government's and Totalcare's policy towards the disposal of pesticides at Mitchell.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .