|
Bio-Solids = Hazardous Waste |
|
|
|
Dear Editor:
Nanaimo News Bulletin
October 18, 2007
Environment Minister Barry Penner's response to concerns about the new Soil Amendment Code of Practice Government's Code of Practices Protects People, Environment, Oct 16th) is misleading.
Mr. Penner says that adding nutrients to soil can enhance crop growth, and who could argue with that? What he fails to mention is that many ingredients of industrial and domestic sewage sludge are toxic, and these will also be added to the soil.
The Minister's reference to "lime, ash and biosolids, - in other words,
fertilizer" is alarming. "Biosolids" represent a PR re-branding of
what has previously been known as hazardous sludge waste, and is known
to contain a wide range of highly toxic materials.
Sewage sludge is a cocktail mix of everything flushed into the system
from both domestic and urban industrial sewers. While the composition
of sludge changes as often as materials are flushed into the system, on
any given day, according to Cornell University and the American Society
of Civil Engineers, it may contain: Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs);
chlorinated pesticides such as DDT, aldrin, endrin, chlordane, and 2,4,
-D; heavy metals from wood preservatives, pesticides, metal plating,
and batteries; bacteria; viruses; fungi; chlorinated compounds; flame
retardants, asbestos; petroleum products; industrial solvents; and
dioxins. Fertilizer?
Mr. Penner says "All jurisdictions in North America and Europe have
rules or regulations governing how agricultural, industrial and
municipal residuals may be used on land", but in many jurisdictions,
those very regulations disallow the practice.
For example, the National Farmers Association of Sweden has eliminated
the use of sludge on agricultural fields after finding elevated levels
of brominated fire retardants. The Netherlands does not spread sludge
on agricultural land, and in Quebec, the government has proposed
regulation amendments to ban compost containing municipal sludge or
treatment wastewater sludge from being spread on pasture land or land
where crops are being grown for human consumption.
The minister states: "The code of practice prohibits application of
waste in quantities that would exceed the nutrient needs of the plants
at the application site. In addition, it must be clearly shown the soil
condition will be improved."
The minister may wish to review the document he signed. The code
provides only that if application rates exceed crop nutrition
requirements then the plan must set out a process for monitoring the
composition of the soil and make a statement of the potential changes
in the soil and vegetation quality (Section 8.4(e)). There is no
requirement anywhere in this code to demonstrate soil improvement.
Finally, Mr Penner asserts that "Šthe goal with this code of practice
is to protect the environment and human health and safety and to
support waste reduction, reuse and recycling". Let us hope this is
true, as it will inevitably lead to the revoking of this ill-advised
legislation.
Yours truly,
Elizabeth White, Salt Spring |
Air Pollutants