How to work out what’s true about a waste-to-energy plant
My introduction to the world of conspiracy theory, misinformation and disinformation happened not long after I left school. I’d become interested in organic gardening and joined the local branch of an international association devoted to the subject.
It turned out that the folk who rejected ‘conventional’ approaches to agriculture rejected pretty much everything conventional including government, science and technology.
‘Big Pharma’ and the medical profession were not to be trusted, vaccines made people sick, fluoride damaged our brains and microwave ovens caused cancer. Glyphosate (Roundup) was the harbinger of the end times, the UN was a conspiracy led by ‘elites’ who wanted to control the world and the financial system was being manipulated for the benefit of the Rothschild family. Thirty-eight years later the Rothschilds have been superseded by George Soros - otherwise everything is exactly as it was, the only difference is the method.
Back then conspiracy theory, disinformation and misinformation was spread by word of mouth, pamphlets and books to small specialist audiences. These days it’s broadcast across a diverse array of internet based media platforms to audiences in the millions.
Conspiracy theory is a belief that an event or situation is the result of a secret plan made by powerful people. Misinformation is false or misleading information while disinformation is deliberately deceptive information.
The roots of disinformation are found in the Russian term dezinformatsiya. The Soviets used dezinformatsiya to undermine social cohesion in countries they considered enemies. Among the many disinformation campaigns carried out by the Soviet Union in the 1960s and 70s was a claim that the US government was using fluoridation as a population control measure. Fluoride disinformation was aimed at fostering anti-government sentiment among the poorly educated and disadvantaged and it quickly spread around the world much like the recent anti-vaccination disinformation spread by Russian troll farms, the successors to the Soviet disinformation tradition.
The Russians used anti-vaccination propaganda extensively during the 2016 US federal elections for the purpose of subversion and it had a profound effect on immunisation rates all over the world including New Zealand.
In 2017 it was announced that NZ had eliminated rubella and measles. Two years later disinformation about the measles vaccine saw vaccination rates fall so sharply that we suffered our worst measles epidemic since 1938.
The fragility of social cohesion was front and centre during the Covid crisis as a Pandora's box of conspiracy, lies and false information came very close to derailing efforts to counter the disease.
With so much information available online it can be difficult to figure out what is true and what is not. I was reminded of all this recently while following social media talk regarding the proposed waste to energy plant for Te Awamutu.
I decided to fact-check claims that were being made against the idea but a simple Google search led me to a quagmire of questionable ‘information’ courtesy of zero waste and environmental NGOS. Ideologically opposed to waste incineration, it turned out these organisations were more than willing to use conspiracy, misleading and false information to aid their cause.
After some effort I found the actual science and an altogether different story emerged. Claims that Te Awamutu would be sitting under a pall of toxic smoke that would make people sick and contaminate farmland turned out to be disinformation.
That might have been the case 40 years ago but, in today's reality, modern waste incineration technology is very clean and produces minimal pollution. The worst of it is carbon dioxide, and while this is undesirable, when measured against atmospheric emissions from landfill, incineration comes out the winner.
One of the other main claims against waste incineration is that it undermines recycling efforts. It can, but not always. Germany operates some 156 incinerators and recycles 67% of its waste. Singapore operates four incinerators and recycles 60% of its waste while Sweden operates 34 waste to energy plants and manages a reasonable and rapidly growing 49% recycling rate. Most countries operating waste to energy technology are doing very well with recycling, then there’s Japan. With 1200 incineration plants and a paltry 20% recycling rate they prefer to burn rather than reuse. On the other hand, close neighbour South Korea operates 183 incineration plants and is among the world's top three recyclers.
While there are no official figures for recycling in NZ, estimates suggest it is about 25%. The bulk of our waste (72%) goes to landfill. In Germany it is 10%, in Sweden and Singapore it is 1%.
World wide there are some 2500 waste incinerators (including Australia) and as long as there is strict regulatory oversight and a government led commitment to recycling, modern waste to energy technology is not only safe, it is cost effective, efficient and provides a pragmatic solution to the problem of non-recyclables.
Sadly the fear generated by those opposed to waste incineration is undermining any hope of any sort of reasonable discussion about this technology for NZ and, despite the laudable goals of zero waste proponents, their willingness to subvert the facts asks hard questions about their integrity.
As a nation we have become increasingly prone to disinformation and it is quietly undermining our ability to have reasoned discussions about any number of issues.
Finland might just have the solution to the problem. Media literacy is a core part of the national curriculum and from preschool on Finns are taught how to critically assess information. The result is that for five years in a row Finland has been ranked number one in the EU for resilience against misinformation and disinformation.
Perhaps it’s time we considered doing something similar here. Our ability to progress as a nation might depend on it.