AUGUST 22 — Modern cities need modern solutions. As we read this letter, some of the 35,000 tonnes of daily trash in Malaysia is looking for a resting place near the rakyat, because some people are dead set against incinerators.
Which is why (KL Tak Nak Incinerator) KTI movement should study the potential of incinerators and not just oppose it because it is new technology. They should try to help residents, not just showing their objection to the government, which seems personal backed by certain quarters.
The residents problem is trash, and there is more and more of it.
My concern levels increased when reading about the landfill in Ayer Hitam, Puchong over the weekend. The landfill management turned it into a recreational park. This is not because the company wants to help out with our recreational activities, but because since landfills can sink over time they are never used for home or commercial constructions. Also, the land won’t be used as agricultural land because it has trash under it.
The land cannot be used for many things after it is used up as a landfill.
But also it is obvious that the process of rehabilitating the land for any use when it needs to be closed will be expensive and require expertise.
Which is why I turn my attention to the benefits of incinerators.
They, previously pointed out logistical problems surrounding the incinerator, the criticism was not about the incinerator itself.
Any problem related to the plant’s exterior, like building a higher emission pipe and locating away from sensitive constructions, can be overcome.
KTI and other objectors focus on previous problems with mini-incinerators and refuse to engage on the failures of many landfills as stated by the government.
All technologies have problems, but the landfills use up space. This is a problem, and with a growing city population, long term and cheaper solutions are necessary. Waste to Energy (WTE) plants can do the job if done right.
We are wasting our time objecting when we can work with the potential contractors, ministries and city hall to have a better incinerator operation.
KTI is trying to speak for all of the city, but there are many like me who are curious about their undying love for landfills. They should be fair to all solutions with the people’s interest being the most important thing in this situation.
There is a moral argument against landfills.
Landfills take our trash from our city zones and bury them in the outskirts. Taking city problems to the areas just outside the city, is about passing the problem to other people. Waste disposal will produce some level of pollution, which can be managed, but why should the people outside KL pay for the smelly garbage of city residents?
A proper incinerator means dealing with our own trash problems in the affected area, and not exporting problems.
It is clear as the time passes, and the objections become more desperate, that fear is the main weapon of the complainers.
I am afraid they have frightened local residents, who paint landfills as perfect and incinerators as dangerous options.
They are scaring people into thinking support for incinerators means you are against recycling. This is not the case. Recycling should always happen and the 35,000 tonnes of trash per day must be reduced. But today is a choice between landfills and incinerators.
Ten incinerators can deal with most of the trash in Malaysia. There will be fewer landfills, and more land for housing and communities. These landfills can be homes for the millions of young Malaysians trying to buy an affordable house.
* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail Online.
