Staff reporter
After making a number of failed attempts to address town council to seek information regarding a proposed ethanol plant in Rimbey, a group of concerned citizens known as the Rimbey United Church Board (RUCB) have taken it upon themselves to hold a public forum to address the issue, with or without the input of town council.
“In November of 2008 a delegation of the women’s group of the United Church visited the town council at their meeting and brought our recycling concerns forward and we were hoping that they would do something about recycling,” said Marion Slomp, spokesperson for the group. “They said they couldn’t do anything and were waiting for the ethanol plant and then we could bring all our cardboard, paper and plastics there and for now, that they’d store it, burn it and line the landfill with the glass they crush. Then after the plant was finished, all of it would go to the ethanol plant.”
And while their concerns aren’t so much about the new plant, they are concerned about the perceived lack of recycling efforts or options on the part of the town.
“There are people in town who, like us, know this is not happening in Rimbey, so people are driving to Ponoka or Bentley or even to Edmonton to bring their recycling in,” Slomp said. “We want as much information made available as possible and we would be happy if there were people from the ethanol there to put in their concerns. We would love to have that kind of discussion and open conversation. We got the feeling that town council is deceiving the public, and nobody should know about it.”
As part of the Oct. 22 meeting, the group has invited Christina Seidel, executive director of the Recycling Council of Alberta as their keynote speaker. She said when it comes to a true commitment to recycling, there are many alternatives that should be addressed immediately rather than waiting years for the completion of an ethanol plant.
“The thing at issue here is not the production of ethanol, it’s what the inputs will be into the plant. There are a number of these facilities being proposed in lots of places. Interestingly enough, there isn’t one operating successfully anywhere yet, so it’s rather unproven technology,” Seidel said. “But that’s beside the point because we get new technology all the time and that doesn’t mean it’s not worthwhile. The issue is that this, in a lot of places, is being seen as a panacea to our waste problems, and it is not.”
In particular, Seidel said first and foremost, any recyclable material that can be diverted from the waste stream must be the top priority given the fact that ethanol plants cannot process plastic, glass and metal. Further, she said the environmental benefits of good old-fashioned recycling would far outweigh any benefits gained from any type of fuel production.
“These technologies do not replace recycling. It’s very short-sighted and it’s not the best environmental option. We need to be maximizing recycling first,” Seidel said. “There might be some organic fractions of the waste for example that might make perfect sense to go into a facility like this, but the recyclables like cardboard that are being burned right now, is an absolutely unacceptable practice. That needs to be diverted for recycling.”
Another big concern for Seidel and the RUCB is where the substantial amounts of organic-based product will come from to produce the fuel and the costs associated with it.
“For ethanol plants to operate properly they really need a homogenized material and ideally, that material should be essentially one that can be broken down biologically, so we’re talking organics,” Seidel said. “That’s the ideal input for a plant like this. Municipal solid waste, at the end of the day, is not what they really like to use anyway, so from both sides, it’s not the best solution.”
Specifically, she said the cost of labour involved to manually separate municipal waste from what can and cannot be used in an ethanol plant, along with the substantial costs involved in building the facility, would make the project cost-prohibitive.
“The other thing I’d like to point out with these types of facilities and the research we’ve done–and we’ve been monitoring these facilities all around the world–they also tend to be quite an expensive technology so not only is it not the best environmental option, but from what we’ve seen, it’s not usually the best financial option either,” Seidel said. “That’s why you’ll notice that these facilities, bar none, are always looking for huge government grants and the reason why is because they are expensive.”
One mitigating factor in any effort to achieve a more efficient process and a greater commitment to recycling projects on a community level is where to find buyers for recycled items without absorbing excessive costs, especially when it comes to cardboard.
Price for recycled cardboard flat-lining
“The recycling of cardboard has basically turned into a non-existent market. It’s a ‘cost for drop off’ at recyclers and as of yet, we still can’t get a clear indication from those people (the recyclers of cardboard) exactly where the cardboard is going,” said Rimbey Mayor Dale Barr. “So we certainly have a challenge in balancing dollars with the programs–and recycling is a very important part of Rimbey’s program–however so is the budget and we have to make those economics real and not just spend money to move cardboard from one location to another that winds up not be recycled.”
In defending the town’s position on recycling projects, Barr said council is just as committed as anyone else when it comes to protecting the environment.
“We as a council are also concerned about recycling and have been working for the last four and a half years on a complete greening of Rimbey with the ethanol project, which accepts municipal solid waste, as part of the recycling program, which turns it into ethanol,” he said. “The issues in front of the community right now are cardboard, newspapers, magazines, bottles and the whole recycling program that’s out there. The issue for the community is the cost of those programs and where the end product winds up.”
In seeking feedback from the public regarding recycling at public meetings, Barr said council has been down that road many times in the past with little response from citizens.
“The town has public meetings on a regular basis and we have had a number of meetings already on the ethanol project,” he said. “The recycling program has been discussed at the taxpayer’s meeting, which we’ve had very low attendance to over the last two years, but again, we try to involve the community as much as we can with the process at opportune times and the recycling program is something that’s under council’s constant review.”
In regards to the public forum proposed by the RUCB, Barr said the town would be more than willing to take part and hopes citizens will do the same.
“The public consultation process and a public meeting–we’re certainly in favour of any of those vehicles–but our problem has been in getting an attendance to come to those meetings to share not just the problem, but solutions as well,” he said.
In their efforts to bring the issue of recycling to the forefront, the RUCB has gained support from a number of other organizations including the Rimbey Lions Club, which oversees a number of recycling projects, Rimbey and District Clean Air People (RADCAP) and the National Farmer’s Union.
“We want leadership from the Town because they’re the ones who have the ability, the contacts and the power to make things happen and we want them to be accountable,” Slomp concluded. “We want them to do what’s right for the public, because that’s why they’re there.”