CCL against new pact at refuse site
By Diane Knich
The Coastal Conservation League is opposed to Charleston County continuing to burn most of its trash in an incinerator off Spruill Avenue in North Charleston in the absence of an overall plan to reduce air pollution in the largely industrial area.
A conservation league staff member, in a Sunday story in The Post and Courier, said the league was taking a neutral position on whether the county should renew a 20-year contract with Montenay Charleston Resource Recovery, the company that runs the incinerator.
The Post and Courier
Charleston County incinerator.
On Tuesday, league Executive Director Dana Beach said that doesn't adequately represent the league's position.
A consultant hired by Charleston County Council will make a recommendation Thursday on whether the county should continue burning most of its trash or rely more heavily on other disposal options, such as dumping it in a landfill and increasing recycling efforts.
County Council will decide soon after the presentation whether to sign another contract with Montenay. The county has been burning trash at the facility for nearly 20 years.
"We urge the county not to renew the incinerator's contract until they have put concrete measures in place to significantly reduce the air pollution impacts on citizens from all major sources in this area," Beach said.
If you go
WHAT: Presentations on Kessler Consulting's recommendations on Charleston County's waste-to-energy facility.
WHEN: Charleston County Green Ribbon Committee, 9 a.m. Thursday; County Council Finance Committee, 4:15 p.m. Thursday.
WHERE: Lonnie Hamilton III Public Services Building, 4045 Bridge View Drive, North Charleston.
Lee Bazzle, facility manager for Montenay, said the company needs to know soon if it will get another county contract. AT&T now owns the facility; Montenay has an agreement to purchase it, but must do so by April 1.
Many of the predominantly black, lower-income residents of Union Heights, Howard Heights and other Neck Area neighborhoods are strongly opposed to the county's extending Montenay's contract.
They say the fallout from burning 70 percent of the county's trash has been landing on their doorsteps for nearly two decades.
They understand that emissions from the incinerator, also known as a waste-to-energy facility because it converts trash to electric power, fall within legal air-quality limits. But they say they're tired of the stench, noise, smoke and ash.
"We share the community's concerns about air quality," Beach said, adding that air in the Neck Area will be far worse after a proposed expansion of the Port of Charleston opens in 2013. The expansion, he said, "will produce dangerous amounts of diesel emissions coming from trucks and ships."
The incinerator's contribution to overall air pollution in the area is relatively small compared with what the new port terminal will bring, Beach said, but it is consequential.
Previous story
Incinerator's contract extension at issue, published 03/08/09
"The incinerator is a symbol of the neglect that these communities have suffered from for years."
If the port and other industries in the area all agreed to and follow strict air-quality guidelines developed to curb pollution, continuing to burn in the incinerator could be a viable solid-waste disposal option, Beach said.
No such plan is in the works.
The decision on whether to extend Montenay's contract is a huge one, County Council members have said, because if the facility closes, most of the waste likely will go to the Bees Ferry Landfill.
If that happens, the landfill stacks will be higher and it will fill up faster.
Councilman Vic Rawl, who represents the area where the landfill sits, has said he's also concerned that putting more trash in landfills will contaminate the groundwater in the low-lying Charleston area.
Beach said he's also concerned that if council votes against extending Montenay's contract, it conveys the impression that the air in the Neck Area will be fine. And that's not true, he said.
"There is much more work to be done to make these neighborhoods the healthy place the residents deserve."
Reach Diane Knich at 937-5491 or dknich@postandcourier.com.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly versionComments
eatmorecollards (anonymous) says...
Just what is the CCL's position? The best I can tell it is to stop, slow down or reverse all progress and expansion in the coastal areas of three states, showing little regard to the long term financial needs of the people who have to make a living in these areas.
If I am wrong in my assertion, I invite someone to explain their position to me.
March 11, 2009 at 9:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
CaptKick (anonymous) says...
If Dana Beach is sucessful in shutting down the incinerator his next step will be to complain about the landfill were the trash ends up. Get a life Dana!!!!
March 11, 2009 at 9:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
zoomru (anonymous) says...
LOL......
Is he going to EDUCATE and inform citizens about the PLASMA Converter Choice that we have....!?!
CaptKICK......technology has CHANGED !?! Obama is president and HE wants CHANGE...!?!?!
March 11, 2009 at 9:44 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DreamMom (anonymous) says...
As someone who has supported the Coastal Conservation League and in many cases admired what they have been able to do, I am concerned about their latest mis-step. When the CCL staff looked at the air quality of the incinerator and that of the landfill, they found like another engineering firm the landfill is a much bigger polluter of greenhouse gases that destroys our environment than that of the incinerator. The Post and Courier clearly has an objective versus laying out the facts for readers like me to make an educated decision. I believe the incinerator should be part of the overall strategy to deal with household trash. I hope Council will look above the emotion of a handful of residents who live in the industrial zoned area of North Charleston and look at the facts and oppose landfill expansion to the height of the round Holiday Inn or any new landfill.
March 11, 2009 at 11:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
kiteboarder (anonymous) says...
Sounds like Dana is playing poltics yet again. Governor Sanford said recently that Dana just can't sit on the side lines and say no to option A and no to option B without helping to solve problems. First, you were opposed to the port being on Daniel Island and now you oppose the port moving to the Navy Base. When the CCL staff looked at the facts, they were okay with it until Dana changed the position of the group versus following the facts.
I guess its a whole lot easier to throw stones than come up with logical solutions. I'm opposed to landfill expansion and the notion that some folks on council are okay with piling trash to the height of the round Holiday Inn -is WRONG. It's funny how Dana is okay with expanding landfills and creating new ones as long as he can't see them from his home on Kiawah!
March 11, 2009 at 11:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JohnS (anonymous) says...
The trash site is greener than a landfill. The neighbors are just complaining because someone said they can get a hand out. Being near this site for 14 years you would not know it was their unless the newspaper printed a story about it.
March 11, 2009 at 11:37 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
BigDukeSix (anonymous) says...
the dudes from montanay must be from around here. every local knows that if you want the support of a local enviro group like ccl, you become a super-platinum-level supporter. what a typical, pathetic display of greenmail.
March 11, 2009 at 12:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Sunrise (anonymous) says...
How about we move the incinerator to Bees Ferry and then let the residents there decide which is best - poor air quality and toxic ash spread as groundcover, or a tall and leaky landfill? That might prompt more research into what really is the lesser of 2 evils, as well as looking at options such as increasing recycling efforts, rather than giving a quick yes or no to a not so simple problem. The communities of the neck area, like any other place, deserve to have many options thoroughly reviewed when it comes to their health and quality of life.
March 11, 2009 at 12:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
onecommonthread (anonymous) says...
It is shocking to me the amount of individuals in this area that are in support of an out dated method of dealing with trash, the incinerator. The residents in the "Neck Area" of North Charleston deserve like anyone else to live in an area that is environmentally safe.
The incinerator is not a race or class issue but a human issue. That area has carried this burden for 20 years now. The community does not want it there.
The argument that the residents should bare this burden for another 20 years because they live in an industrial area is nonsense. Can the same argument be made for the people that live near the landfill? If you agree with the first statement, you have to say yes to the second. I say no to both because the citizens of the Charleston area have to become more conscious of their relationship with the environment. When this happen, we will see a real effort to address the trash issue here and not shift the problem from community to community.
I am glad that the CCL is now standing against the incinerator. We need more people to put their selfish agendas aside and look at real solutions to the problem.
I hope on Thursday Charleston Council chooses not to renew the contract. Believe me this issue is not going to go away that easily if the contract is renewed. The fight will only have just begun.
March 11, 2009 at 2:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
rollo (anonymous) says...
Perhaps all the trash that will accumulate if the incinerator is shut down would be dumped in Dana Beachs' front yard?
Beach is such an expert on all things trashy, he should be able to wave a magic wand and transform this debris to whale food with 0 effort!
March 11, 2009 at 10:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jdargonaut (anonymous) says...
onecommonthread,
You are just as much of a cluebag as zoomie. Everyone knows that there has to be a better way, BUT we just haven't gotten it yet. Plasma just like cold fusion is just too out of reach right now.
What do you do with your garbage? Or, is it someone elses problem?
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
Increased recycling efforts? PIPE DREAM.
JDA
March 11, 2009 at 10:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.
- Most Commented
- Most Emailed
- S.C. losing port traffic to other states
- Out with old ...
- Water — 'The smell is gone'
- Cart gives Buddy new lease on life
- Schools plan to update visitor-security system
- GenPhar site 'red-tagged'
- Man, 17, killed in motorcycle wreck
- Off campus
- Historic manor house used by Girl Scouts is among buildings that might be torn down to make way for future
- Biting research
