Sludge Watch ==> War over Waste-Province of Ontario Pushed to Close Paper Sludge Loophole

[maureen.reilly at sympatico.ca]

Sludgewatch Admin:

This story didn't mention the $ 1.3 Million dollar lawsuit from the famous 
St Catherines Hernder Winery against a Noranda paper mill for destroying 43 
acres of their grape vines.  A half dozen other farms were also damaged but 
those farmers settled out of court.

That is part of the problem ... the damage is settled privately - often with 
non-disclosure agreements- and the companies are free to say the sludge is 
'harmless' because they have buried their mistakes and withheld evidence of 
damage.  We call it the 'duct tape solution'....binding the mouth of 
opposition with duct tape.

Sometimes the Ontario government gets in on the act, telling the complaining 
public to take it up with the waste hauler instead of regulating the 
materials effectively.  This is a failure of governance.
Under Reg 347 exemption 3.2 ...any hazardous waste, muncipal waste, liquid 
industrial waste becomes an 'exempt waste' if its mixed with something.

Duh?  This exemption is absurdly broad.  It means the sludge berms could 
contain anything... hazardous waste of any kind.

Essentially it means Ontario has no effective waste legislation at all.
....................................................................................

http://www.stcatharinesstandard.ca/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentid=118217&catname=Local+News&classif=News+%2D+Local


The war over waste
The paper industry insists theres nothing to fear from sludge or its many 
uses. But opponents claim its hazardous. And the province is under 
increasing pressure to establish regulations

Matthew Van Dongen, St Catherines Standard
Saturday, July 22, 2006


Jonathan Ng from Abitibi Consolidated holds paper fibre biosolids.


Photo: STAFF PHOTO BY BOB TYMCZYSZYN
It has been used to build hills for rolling golf fairways.

It has fertilized Niagara farm fields for decades.

A few years ago, it helped turn an abandoned limestone quarry in Lincoln 
into a vineyard.

Today, its sitting in a 20,000-tonne heap on a Pelham property.

The pile of paper fibre biosolids is supposed to stop nearby train noise but 
its causing a deafening uproar in the rural municipality.

The controversial biosolids most people call it sludge are a waste byproduct 
of paper recycling at Abitibi Consolidated in Thorold.

Up close, it looks like fibrous, muddy-grey insulation.

>From afar, the L-shaped Church Street berm looks like a towering grey 
mountain dotted with tiny yellow bulldozers 144 metres long, 21 metres wide, 
about six metres high and growing.

Put another way, the pile is longer than a football field and taller than 
the machines that build it.

Its a big issue in Pelham, where many people believe the pungent pile is 
leaking chemicals and bacteria into the air and water.

Its a dot on the landscape, however, compared to the amounts stockpiled 
across the province.

Hundreds of thousands of tonnes of sludge are produced by recycling plants 
across Ontario every year.

Thorolds Abitibi mill alone produces 400 tonnes of the stuff every day.

Everyone agrees it has to go somewhere.

But no one agrees on a solution and the province faces an angry backlash 
from Ontario communities tired of seeing the problem literally dumped in 
their backyards.

qqq

The conflict is muddied by radically different perspectives on sludge.

Opponents such as Maureen Reilly, who runs a Sludge Watch website dedicated 
to tracking biosolids, say its use can hurt the environment and human 
health. Berm neighbours worry about inks and chemicals left over from 
recycled paper and E. coli bacteria in the rotting material.

Producers say its mostly water, paper fibre and clay great for fertilizer if 
mixed with compost. Or, if you mix it with sand and cover it with grass, for 
building a sound berm.

Marc Macdonald knows a lot of people disagree with Abitibi’s opinion, but 
he’s adamant nonetheless.

“It’s benign, it’s non-toxic,” said Macdonald, the community relations 
manager for the Thorold mill. “It’s been tested and tested again. I don’t 
know how many times or how else I can say that.”

He says it a lot.

The Pelham berm has been a regular news item on television, radio and 
newspapers since it started to grow.

Residents call it an unlicensed landfill.

Abitibi calls it full-circle recycling.

“I think it would be irresponsible to put it in our landfills,” Macdonald 
said.

“This is putting a waste product to positive use. You can’t get much better 
than that.”

When it comes to recycling, many people don’t think past the grey or blue 
box on the curb, he noted.

But virtually every recycling process creates waste that needs a home.

Most broken glass in blue boxes is landfilled. The muck left over from 
sewage treatment is often spread on farmers’ fields. “Recycling” old 
industrial properties means getting rid of tonnes of contaminated soil.

Disposal options are shrinking.

Just like Toronto garbage, Ontario sludge is no longer welcome in Michigan 
dumps.

Bulging regional landfills can’t take it — and private dumps no longer want 
to.

Walker Industries landfilled paper mill biosolids in the ’70s and ’80s.

They won’t landfill it now.

“I would consider that a waste of space,” said vice-president Mike Watt.

“It can be used in other ways. It just has a bad rap from its latest 
application.”

Walker Industries has put biosolids to use on several occasions.

Four years ago, it topped the closing Mountain Road landfill in Niagara 
Falls with 40,000 tonnes.

Six years ago, it mixed the biosolids with soil to help turn an abandoned 
quarry into an experimental vineyard.

Testing for heavy metals, conducted by the University of Guelph, showed the 
mixture was safe for planting.

“The results didn’t give us any reason for concern. They make wine out of 
those grapes now,” said Watt.

qqq

There’s a big difference between the paper waste biosolids used by Walker 
Industries and those piled at 325 Church St. in Pelham — and it isn’t the 
size of the pile.

It’s regulation.

Under the provincial Environmental Protection Act, the Ministry of the 
Environment has to approve and regulate the application of waste.

Normally, that includes paper waste biosolids.

But in the early ’90s, the province created an exemption to the waste 
regulation to promote recycling.

The exemption allows companies that market waste as a saleable product, or 
use it in an ongoing manufacturing process, to do so without ministry 
approval.

(The exemption isn’t supposed to apply to waste management or land 
application, a contentious point for Sound-Sorb opponents.)

So now, various companies — including Abitibi’s contractor, Empire 
Agri-Services Inc. — are mixing paper fibre sludge with sand and calling it 
Sound-Sorb, a federally trademarked term.

What that boils down to is anyone can legally construct a berm with 
Sound-Sorb, in any amount, without government approval or knowledge.

It’s happening all over Ontario, said Sludge Watch’s Reilly. There are at 
least 30 Sound-Sorb berms across the province, including two older ones in 
West Lincoln and a new one in Port Colborne.

“That exemption makes a mockery of waste regulations altogether. It’s 
absurd,” said Reilly, who has helped organize community resistance to 
incoming berms in several communities, including Pelham.

“If you have an exemption that essentially says a waste is no longer a waste 
once you mix it with something else — anything else — then you no longer 
have any waste regulations at all.”

Reilly isn’t the only one sounding off on Sound-Sorb.

The list of organizations calling for stricter regulation include:

• Ontario’s Environment Commissioner, Gord Miller.

• The Association of Local Public Health Agencies.

• The Ontario Federation of Agriculture.

• Numerous municipalities across Ontario, including Niagara Region, Pelham 
and Port Colborne.

• A provincially mandated expert panel on Sound-Sorb.

With a recommendation from its own panel, the province is under pressure to 
make a change.

But Reilly isn’t convinced it will happen.

“The ministry is in a conflict of interest,” she said. “They’re supposed to 
help municipalities keep waste out of landfills, but they’re also 
responsible for protecting the environment from the effects of waste.”

qqq

The effects of Sound-Sorb on the environment are also up for debate.

For every test result, there are several interpretations.

Abitibi points to biosolids tests it conducts for heavy metals and chemical 
concentrations, submitted regularly to the MOE.

The levels are always below limits mandated by the ministry, said Macdonald 
— and lower than sewage biosolids supplied by Niagara Region that farmers 
inject into their fields as fertilizer.

Opponents point to a Sound-Sorb berm in Hamilton that was ordered removed by 
the courts in 2004 after run-off water tested deadly to trout, with acutely 
toxic levels of lead.

In Pelham, MOE tests found potentially harmful levels of ammonia in water 
pooled at the base of the berm and some off-site contamination of a nearby 
ditch.

The presence of the chemical is no secret — it’s added as part of the 
plant’s waste-treatment process, said Macdonald.

He said as long as the berm run-off is properly contained, which has been 
ordered by the MOE, it’s no risk to the environment.

Both sides look to the expert panel report for support. Abitibi notes the 
panel’s first recommendation was that Sound-Sorb berms should not be banned.

On the other hand, the remaining recommendations suggest the province 
should:

• Regulate the use of Sound-Sorb.

• Require pre-dumping hydrogeological studies and composting.

• Require post-construction water quality monitoring.

Abitibi doesn’t think stricter regulations are necessary, said technical 
services manager Henry Peters.

But the company won’t complain if it happens, either.

“Having to abide by a certificate of approval would provide all parties with 
a comfort level that currently doesn’t exist,” he said.

‘We are not opposed to that.”

qqq

The expert panel’s report has gathered dust for more than a year.

Contrary to popular belief, the ministry isn’t dragging its feet, said Geoff 
Carpentier, the MOE’s point man on the Sound-Sorb issue.

“We’re committed to doing our best to implement the recommendations,” said 
Carpentier, who along with provincial staff is reviewing the expert panel’s 
report.

“Somebody will look to us and say, ‘Look, it’s simple. You have six 
recommendations, they take up a total of 11 lines of text on your page, how 
long can it take you?’ ” he said.

“The difficulty is that it’s not as simple as saying, ‘Yeah, that’s a great 
idea.’

“We need to look at what regulatory change might be required, what policy 
change might be required, what are the impacts on all the stakeholders.”

Carpentier, who is retiring and was to be replaced this week, couldn’t give 
a time frame for how long the review might take.

But he added the ministry is doing more than reviewing the expert panel 
report.

Recently, the MOE came to an agreement with another paper recycler, Atlantic 
Packaging.

The company will now do hydrogeological assessments on the site of any 
future Sound-Sorb berms built for gun clubs, monitor the properties for 
water quality afterwards and report results to the MOE.

The ministry has also approved a pilot project that may represent the future 
of sludge.

Atlantic Packaging is building a multimillion-dollar incinerator to burn 
sludge and recover the leftover clay.

The incinerator will burn all of the Scarborough facility’s sludge — about 
150 tonnes a day — and in the process provide steam power for the recycling 
plant, said Todd Kostal, director of purchasing and logistics.

The remaining powdered clay, ideally, could be marketed to the construction 
industry, he said.

The company has been looking for sludge alternatives for years, said Kostal 
— certainly since 1999, when a trickle of complaints about an Oshawa gun 
club berm turned into a flood.

“Our view is the current uses (of sludge) are beneficial, but not everyone 
agrees with that,” said Kostal.

“We’re looking for a solution that is less sensitive for people.”

Provided the air emissions are carefully controlled, an incinerator might 
leave “a smaller footprint,” said Reilly.

Abitibi is watching the project and studying similar options, said Peters.

He said the company is spending $100,000 to investigate energy-from-waste 
alternatives.

Not because the company regrets its current practices, however.

Peters wouldn’t say exactly how much Abitibi pays to dispose of sludge, but 
it’s in the “millions of dollars.”

Options like incineration — and maybe even the marketing of leftover clay — 
would mean big savings, he said.

Economics is driving the study, he said, not environmental guilt.

“People tend to assume it’s more profitable to be environmentally 
irresponsible. The exact opposite is true.”

“Is (the Pelham protest) influencing our future direction? I would say not.”



mvandongen at stcatharinesstandard.ca