THE conflagration at Riverton has everybody talking. And that is good. Because if we talk long enough more of us will become aware of the continuing health and environmental disaster facing us from that source. Not to mention the catastrophe-in-waiting as these fires can travel underground for several miles and there are critical activities virtually next door: These include a petrol station and a major manufacturer of industrial gases.

Landfill?

There are those who refer to the facility as a landfill. That is not correct. A landfill is a carefully designed structure built into or on top of the ground in which garbage is isolated from the surrounding environment (groundwater, air, rain). This isolation is accomplished with a bottom liner of clay or plastic and daily covering of soil. The objective is to isolate our garbage from groundwater to keep it dry and prevent contact with air.

What presently exists at Riverton is 120 unfenced acres of land on which, for the past 55 years, we throw all our garbage, which includes the potentially deadly medical waste, residential and industrial waste — including tyres and batteries — as well as dead animals and, occasionally, dead humans.

People who scavenge products for recycling live there in very insanitary conditions. They also raise livestock for human consumption that feed on the garbage left there. Since there is no lining, leachate — a liquid containing harmful substances from this decaying matter — is entering our groundwater. Since there is not adequate coverage, it is impossible to reduce the amount of harmful landfill gases, like methane and carbon dioxide, which are emitted into the atmosphere. This is a dump.

Shouting fire!

There are claims that these fires are deliberately set two or three times each year. On this occasion, notably, the head of the fire department claims that it is the result of arson. His explanation is that the fire covered about 90 acres in a very short time. It is for this reason that I am prepared to challenge his theory.

There are claims that soldiers and other security personnel are on duty at the dump. For one to put things in place to achieve a spontaneous combustion of 90 acres requires a variety of resources in amounts unavailable to most. What seems more likely is that a buried heat source resulting from biological decomposition or chemical oxidation produced a rise in temperature and the waste mass could not dissipate the heat faster than it was being produced. They call this thermal runaway.

May I suggest, respectfully, that the experts consider this possibility. Before the suggestion is ignored I wish to point out that there are, on average, 8,300 such fires at landfills in the US each year. And only 40 per cent of them are the result of arson.

When the smoke clears

After 55 years, I am particularly concerned for the operators of heavy equipment at the dump, as the decomposing material often creates sinkholes. One famous case is at Hillsborough in Florida which developed in 2010.

There seems to be an attempt by people who should know better to say that the fire is under control so everything is now OK. Hold on there! A burning dump releases a wide range of pollutants. These include carbon monoxide, aldehydes, acrolein, benzo, hydrogen bromide, hydrogen cyanide, hydrogen floride, nitrogen oxide, phenol, sulfur dioxide, dioxins, and furans. The fact that medical cases are no longer seen does not mean that all is well. Those are just the early signs that something may go wrong later. These pollutants have both short-term and long-term health implications.

Patrick Foss-Smith, a UK-based global expert on dump fires, claims that other possible disorders include cardiovascular and respiratory diseases as well as boosted rates of diabetes and gastrointestinal cancer, reproductive and developmental problems, damage to the immune system, and interference with hormones, infant mortality, low birth weights, childhood asthma, coughs, wheezing, chest tightness, shortness of breath, burning in eyes, nose and throat, dizziness, weakness, and confusion.

The type of smoke I observed strongly suggests that tyres were also burning. Tyres contain a number of ecologically unfriendly components. Such fires are difficult to contain or extinguish, and we should not be surprised if they flare up again weeks or months later, particularly if it is not properly covered. The particulate carbon from burning tyres can be so small it can be airborne for two weeks and can pass from the lungs into the bloodstream. Why aren’t these tyres recycled and used, instead, in the making of basketball courts and sidewalks? It is done elsewhere.

More than talk

I was listening to a highly regarded talk show host with one of my regular callers. The host made me feel frustrated and a little angry. She gave about three sound, solid, workable solutions to this problem. But these were all punctuated with “…but our people not going want to cooperate,…they are not going to comply”. The caller responded this way: “…but, Miss, prison nuh mek fi dawg enuh.” That made my day.

In Singapore, the fine for littering starts at J$174,000. There are very few violations. The garbage does not belong to the Government. It is our garbage and we have to work together, using appropriate technology, to find solutions. The daily coverage required at the dump is not happening. The budget allocation is $75 million short of what is required. What is to be done will not be done. So we will have more of the same in the future. What can we do?

Firstly, the maintenance of the present dump in its present form is not feasible. The removal is, however, fraught with problems. The operators of landfills elsewhere are required to maintain and monitor landfills up to 30 years after they are closed. The tendency is to use up our best agricultural lands for all sorts of programmes. The acreage under commercial agriculture is rapidly being depleted as we build more sprawling housing estates. I suspect this is where the authorities may be looking, as our captains of agriculture do not seem to be concerned about the depletion of this critical resource.

The first step is for each of us to find ways to reduce the amount of waste we produce. Businesses could start using more refillable and reusable containers that use less material to achieve the same purpose.

Resource recovery — described in this case as the systematic diversion of waste for another use — must be considered. Recyclables can be processed to extract or recover materials to convert to energy. These activities reduce the amount of waste destined for landfills. Recoverable material that is organic in nature can be processed for mulch and composting to be used for agriculture and landscaping.

It should be a requirement of businesses and households to separate their waste and eliminate the need for labour to be found to do this elsewhere. Clearly marked bins could be provided for this purpose.

Incineration is a useful method of disposal of both solid waste and residue from wastewater management. This process can reduce the volume of solid waste by 70 or 80 per cent. Countries like the US with vast land space can afford large landfills. Maybe we should be looking to places like Japan for solutions. There, incineration to reduce waste is more common. Their waste-to-energy technology is also worthy of note as the generation of electricity and fuel for cooking from waste is practised successfully. Globally, waste to energy accounts for 16 per cent of waste management.

It is important that those who are put in positions to manage solid waste become more proactive and stop hiding behind the “no-resources” excuse. They, or whoever put them there, should explore the possibilities of becoming more creative in finding solutions. The University of Florida is a stone’s throw away. They offer 21 courses, of varying duration, dealing with solid waste management.

Truth be told, the Government does not have the resources to deal with this matter appropriately. Perhaps a private partner is the answer. Properly run, this facility should be able to pay its bills.

We need to change the mindset that waste is something to be discarded and disposed of with no regard for future use. When we start to see it as a valuable resource, with revenue potential, a whole new world of ideas will come to us. If we reduce, reuse and recycle waste it will be possible to provide employment and reduce the size of the dump from 120 acres to a well-managed 30-acre landfill.

Glenn Tucker is an educator and a sociologist. He can be reached at glenntucker2011@gmail.com