Waste incineration

[@ceedaddy]

0:10 Waste garbage dumps give off 500% more CO2 than incineration of waste. Burning DOESNT waste energy that while incinerating could be used to heat water into steam which would turn turbines which would power electric generators. Whereas trash just being heaped up into piles and left to rot, loses all that potential stored energy as well as giving off 500% or more CO2 gases than incineration does.

[@robjones899]

Uk now has 57 plants and building 11 more.

[@HiroCreates3747]

The left and right audio channels are used in a pretty crazy way. I suggest listening to it without headphones.

[@fortitudevalance8424]

Seen this in Singapore. Astutely designed for minimal co2 emissions and the city state has zero trash problems.

[@Panchyishere]

Dude it’s like Toy Story 3

[@julianportillo2629]

I think at least 50% of us here just because of that movie

[@petercdowney]

To be fair, though, the Netherlands (an example of another country using incinerators mentioned, at 4:39) doesn't have much land suitable for landfill. Dig a pit in the Netherlands and it'll fill with water almost immediately.

[@huskyshikakatan]

1:04 "As paper, wood and food leftovers produce almost no carbon dioxide while burned, ..." How come??

[@Cce339]

The trees and plants from which that stuff was produced, took the same amount of CO2 out of the air when they grew.

[@Sorenzo]

As Cicerone says, these products removed CO2 out of the atmosphere while growing, so you're only returning an amount you had withdrawn - unlike with coal and oil, which are taken out of the ground and added to the atmosphere.

[@genli5603]

They produce just as much, but it doesn't "count" against their CO2 points because the CO2 was recently in the atmosphere, whereas fossil fuel CO2 was in the atmosphere longer ago.

[@petercdowney]

@@Cce339 But if there's any plastic in the waste (low-grade plastics and black plastics cannot be recycled), that's not carbon neutral. Those plastics are often derived from oil. And on top of that, all sorts of toxic fumes will be produced if you burn plastic. That's why you should never burn plastic in your fireplace or on a bonfire. Sure, you could always clean the fumes up, scrub the toxic chemicals out of the smoke. Modern incinerators typically do just that. But that produces an extremely toxic sludge which must be disposed of in designated hazardous waste landfills. Most environmentalists believe that burying waste plastic in a landfill is better for the environment than burning it. Recycling plastic also saves more energy than you can generate by burning it.

[@Sorenzo]

I'm a big proponent of this... To be clear, though, Danes are not supposed to put appliances, bottles, or reusable objects in the trash that goes to incineration, and certainly not batteries. We do have an extensive recycling infrastructure, and I think people mostly follow the guidelines. There is always improvements to be made - better filters, better sorting, more efficiency. But the concept works is very sustainable, works very well, and is a good complement to the central heating system, which is quite efficient. That said, I do think that as Denmark pushes towards having a 100% renewable energy infrastructure, central heating will be less relevant due to electrical heating, and improvements to biofuel or alternative waste destruction plants (if such things are possible) could create a better solution for waste management.

[@genli5603]

Batteries usually come through incinerators intact, BTW. Not really an issue. Because of loss factors, electrical heating when not coupled with ground-source heat pump technology isn't really going to be economically rational in cold climates. Co-generation of heat means that you don't go fuel-electricity-heat but fuel-electricity-waste heat from fuel used directly for heat. Low-grade industrial heat can't be recovered to be transformed into power, but it is very useful for space heating, particularly, since the temperature difference between a comfy room and the cuttoff for low grade waste heat is significant. The big problem with using that waste heat is that it really can't travel far at all. So we'll never be using waste heat recovery to heat everybody's houses.

[@hasnaaibrahimi6059]

Ooyh

[@ROCKSOLID19]

I believe it is a good thing to do. It helps to resolve the problem of hideous landfill sites while fulfilling the energy needs of our societys.

[@TheWolfHowling]

I think what they meant was that it doesn't produce any new CO2 into the environment. Probably just got lost in translation

[@Alex-pd4dk]

TheWolfHowling but co2 is good for the environment! Trees adore it!

[@ericmiao2792]

Alex holy shit you’re either extremely stupid or you’re joking

[@michaelmixon2479]

How much energy to burn it compared to how much energy produced? Also, how far has filtering technology come for the exhaust gases?

[@myfeeling4you]

I can only find this frightning as mixed waste is being burnt, if they sorted the toxic from non toxic waste it might, and I say" might" be safer. The problem with recycling is a lot of co2 is emitted in the recycling process, from running extra trucks to pick up the recyclables and the electricity used to run electric motors on the conveyor lines, then the people who sort the waste and the cars they drive to get to work. Wouldn't it be better if more research went into packaging that degraded

[@genli5603]

What this documentary isn't saying is that there is always a massive recovery effort for metals on the back end--most household metals CAN'T be recycled in their consumer forms because they're mixed with other things, like a spring in a pen. They can only be recovered through incineration. Hazardous wastes don't go into this stream, and there are mercury, sulfur, and dioxin scrubbers that keep the emissions clean. Paper is a toss up--soiled paper (about half) is best incinerated or composted, but clean paper is best (financially and ecologically) recycled. Plastic is very expensive to recycle, for the most part. They make far more sense to burn en masse than attempt to sort and recover. Hazardous wastes like tires are burnt in cement kilns instead--their potential toxins get locked up pretty much permanently in the clinker that becomes concrete and mortar.

[@B7BeastAVMan]

why are they burning recyclables?

[@idgaf5252]

Surely all the metals end up in ash which can be easily refined?

[@genli5603]

Correct! It is recovered through some clever processes and then recycled. It allows for the recovery of small bits of metal that are mixed with other things in consumer products--literally the only way to get to most of the metal that consumers generate.

[@rosewhite3495]

it would be simple to reclaim steel, copper and glass and just burn the rest.

[@genli5603]

They do reclaim metals from the ash. The incinerators temperatures are low enough that the incinersator actually makes it easier to recover metal that you can't recover otherwise. Except under very specific conditions, glass is worth virtually nothing and no effort should be put into reclaiming it. It's made out of sand, and it's cheap to make and the process doesn't involve hazardous waste generation. Intact bottles being refilled close to the point of waste creation makes sense. The only other form that makes sense is if you have a fiberglass manufacturer close by.

[@TheWolfHowling]

I think they reason why people do not like the idea of garbage incinerators go back to the fact that people hear that you are burning plastics and their alarm bells go off as we have always been told not to burn plastics as it can produce toxic gases, like benzene. But you really should be saving all the materials that could be reused or recycled like glass & metals like Aluminium, Steel, Copper & Brass, they don't produce energy & end up as slag at the bottom of the combustion chamber

[@genli5603]

Most of the metals can't be separated out from the commercial products until they've been incinerated. Incinerators do a very good job of producing that slag which is then separated from the rest of the ash and recycled.

[@casualriley]

Medical waste is like 90% plastic, it all gets incinerated.

[@OhrCompendium]

0:18 Special Guest: Our Master, The Claw

[@predatortheme]

paper, wood and food leftovers produce almost no carbon dioxide???????

[@francescoguerrini2010]

Not only carbon dioxide but also dioxina and other very toxic substances!

[@lefthanded5473]

@Craig F. Thompson Something you don't want to breath in.

[@recycleman975]

plastic is the one that releases chemicals when burnt

[@recycleman975]

yeah

[@recycleman975]

wood burning is also used for heating houses also older bakery was using wood burning to bake bread

[@chechnya]

I'm mostly worried about CO2 emissions, mercury and other heavy metals being released into the air.

[@Squarerig]

Viny.This information was widely publicised in Germany during the late eighties when debates were being held over waste,its disposal and recycling.Sorry,I cannot give you any further details.But the info must be still available somewhere.

[@Aesop2011]

O.K., burning gives us energy, but what about toxic gasses? We can not rely on filters if we don't really know what are we burning. Color from labels can be pretty toxic, I suppose...

[@AaronLow1]

All I heard was someone calling "pricky, pricky" from the right and I was like, "What the hell"? -Then I realized it was the video

[@petercdowney]

Not necessarily. As far as _plastic_ waste, for instance, is concerned, most environmentalists believe that burying plastic is better for the environment than burning it.

[@P.Productions]

Do you think about energy? Don't you think about cancer for people who live near incinerator? In Italy have been closed some of them for cancer. Incineration is the worst form of waste disposal due to the production of the nanoparticles (see Montanari's files about it), absorbed by the human body that fails to eliminate and which produce cancer by detecting the presence in the blood of people living around the incinerator of metals and substances not normally present.

[@AmolMishrafoRReal]

To do or not to do....Reduce, Reuse, Recycle...!

[@AmolMishrafoRReal]

Yeah u'r right...but as far as I know there has been little modification in the process. The ash which is used to released directly into the atmosphere has now been converted and putted up for some good use like i making fly ash bricks!

[@recycleman975]

Reuse Reduce Recycle not ban goverment : BAN no more plastic straws and spoons

[@recycleman975]

@@AmolMishrafoRReal it has been fitlered and the smoke is 100% clean

[@davidhead5943]

What country is this ?

[@theGerly]

Denmark

[@GreenDevilification]

blame the claw... it has a life of its own you know...

[@chinnipanditi6147]

In explain English is very important and all are understand esily

[@sticksman1979]

Seems smart to burn it for energy.

[@recycleman975]

better than landfill

[@digiroj]

Why do people get excited about burning things that could be reused or recycled? Personally I think it's not a good thing to do (quite apart from the health hazzard of PM2.5's, waste of resourses, damage to tourism, etc, etc) because more jobs are created in recycling. And on the subject of misrepresentation... a lorry carrying the waste to the incinerator has a recycling logo on it. They don't have any right to use that logo - It's being burned. End of the line.

[@genli5603]

More metal is recovered through incineration than can be recovered any other way because the small bits inside products get separated out. You can't recycle solid paper, either. "More jobs are created recycling"="recycling is more expensive and inefficient"--this is not actually a good thing. Recycle what's economically smart to recycle. Compost some of the rest. Burn everything else that you can economically and in a clean way, and then recover the metal that you can from what's left. PM2.5 absolutely is monitored, and you're making up things now.

[@Unibomber2u]

MSW would be treated as hazardous waste if not for the costs involved disclosing this fact . I would not be anywhere live with a hundred miles of this carcinogen spewing dioxin producing cancer causing incinerator now matter how many scrubbers and filters installed.

[@genli5603]

You're not very bright, then, because it's safer than your local wastewater treatment plant, regarding dioxins.

[@Zincink]

Our cars used to be loaded with soot in the 80s. The roofs on houses would turn black... you can see that on Google maps in NJ. We don’t seem to have as much as we previously did but I can remember the people protesting & going ape shit when I was a child over it being built. I curse the thing all the time. It should not be located In a residential area.

[@pixargeek4424]

Who's here cause of toy story 3

[@AirborneCub]

me... because I had to know if there was a trash dump like that irl

[@DiamondBoyWrapperOfflineProduc]

@Chile the Flamingo no

[@DiamondBoyWrapperOfflineProduc]

Because I like woody and he is the main character.

[@DiamondBoyWrapperOfflineProduc]

@Chile the Flamingo ok, what Do you mean?

[@DiamondBoyWrapperOfflineProduc]

YAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSS!!!!

[@waiyinka]

da claw

[@보고싶다셋쇼마루]

garbage cremation???

[@Armadajakenson]

I want to know, how this facility would handle taking me......as waste either as a walk-in, wearing nothing but diapers with a 97 gallon trash tote full of cloth pre-fold diapers, a 32 gallon Rubbermaid trash can full of mixed diapers, two full cases worth of unopened and unused disposable adult diapers, and some opened packs of Cuties size seven diapers along with all of my clothes. How would the facility's intake procedures work? How much would I need to pay for everything and myself? What would happen to me after I was accepted? Be as descriptive as possible in you answer to this. If the facility says that it won't take humans, ask them why they discriminated between animals and humans? (A religious based Superiority complex perhaps?) If any facility accepts one type of flesh, they should accept all types, the incinerator doesn't care nor can it tell the difference between either type of flesh. If their waste acceptance policies state they accept fleshy items, then they can take humans. Alive, dead, in whole or in part. Also, once accepted, I would become property of the facility for them to do with as they see fit. Fact of garbage collection. Would my diapers and I be tossed and or pushed into the pit along with all the rest of the trash? Would anyone care what I had on or not, or if my diaper was wet or not? What if I wanted to change my diaper after acceptance but before final disposal?

[@eyescreamcake]

ಠ_ಠ

[@Armadajakenson]

eyescreamcake What was so...EYE Opening about what I said????

[@Armadajakenson]

eyescreamcake Fact-Check what I said against waste collection rules and policies, and even their "Unspoken" rules

[@Squarerig]

digroi.I should point out that,to recycle plastic bags,requires more energy than in their production.This is a dilemma.The real solution is NOT to produce and use such worthless objects.Try telling that to the average shopper!

[@genli5603]

Why not? They are useful when used, and then they are useful when burned, as they are a fossil fuel like any other. They simply temporarily serve another very useful purpose. Burning plastics is the most sensible use for them at their end of life.

[@SoftPillowWithAKnife]

teh captions are hilarious

[@yogeshghode9987]

Awesome like it most If anyone like my comment then hit 👍 Not compulsory as your wish😊

[@Jack_Rabbit_Ranch]

Too much politics, and not enough about the process.

[@teviblekhman1628]

I can't anderstand

[@cIick_bait]

Ok.

[@HyperRush79]

funny 1% of trash is a almost mint product

[@nigeldunn5523]

Better to burn it in a controlled environment that shipping to aisa to be burned illegally by rogue companies . Saving on road miles and sea miles so all round winner.

[@ahmadba2113]

..

[@B7BeastAVMan]

LOL!! XD

[@dashryenchinoyunsaikhan5360]

I understand

[@nigeldunn5523]

Yes better than shipping it around the world and killing the world's poorest people .

[@我真係唔知點改名]

2222

[@rosewhite3495]

all rubbish should be burned

[@littlesam6280]

Jesus loves you please repent

[@brownhard]

boring