3 ms·
Burying waste may sequester carbon, but also potentially creates a host of other environmental issues down the road when stuff starts leaking into the groundwat
by bogeholm 5y ago
Burying waste may sequester carbon, but also potentially creates a host of other environmental issues down the road when stuff starts leaking into the groundwater.
Proper incineration + smoke scrubbing is, as far as I know, the best way to eliminate organic (as in chemistry) waste in an environmentally friendly way, eg. PVC.
- Retric 5y ago“Potentially creates” is a solvable problem. Further the ash from burning municipal waste is very toxic and still needs to be stored somewhere. The volume is significantly reduced, but waste disposal benefits from the square:cube law reducing the volume doesn’t save that much effort.
- bogeholm 5y agoAs long as smoke temperature quenching, smoke scrubbing etc is done correctly, I can only see that the ash is less toxic in total than the waste, as eg. chlorocarbons are handled by incineration. Still toxic, but less in total. Unless I am missing something?
- Retric 5y agoIt really depends on what was burned. I suspect in general municipal waste probably gets less toxic in total but more difficult to handle. That said toxicity in general is less of an issue than what escapes into the environment, and here I think traditional waste disposal has real advantages.
- Retric 5y agoPS: As an example wet wood ash normally has a PH of 9 to 11 which can cause mild chemical burns while I burned wood is harmless on it’s own.