Authorities in Penang are studying a proposal to build a rubbish incinerator, a move that is likely to spark another public uproar.

The proposal comes barely four months after authorities were forced to relocate a huge incinerator out of Puchong in Kuala Lumpur after residents, concerned about the health and environmental implications, successfully mobilised to oppose the project.

The project was then relocated to Broga, a remote area south of Kuala Lumpur, but residents there are now expressing growing disquiet over the project as well. Close to 100,000 people live in Broga and its surrounding areas.

Few people are aware of the new proposal to build an incinerator in Penang, where some 1.3 million people live. Well-placed sources here have told IPS that the proposal is now under consideration.

One possible site being talked about is Jelutong, a working class area just south of the Penang city centre.

Little publicity

It is not surprising that the project has received little publicity. The Penang state government has already been stung by criticism for a massive highway project.

Residents' groups are up in arms over the state government's insistence in pursuing controversial plans to build an outer ring road o­n the island.

They point out that the planned Penang Outer Ring Road will add to the island's congestion, slice through a popular park and change the character of a coastal landmark, Gurney Drive.

But the lack of public accountability at the local level does not help their effort - local council elections were abolished in Malaysia in the 1970s and few residents know who their government-appointed town councillors are.

The proposal for a new waste incinerator in Penang is likely to spark renewed debate over toxic air emissions and ash that would contain dioxins which can enter the food chain.

Dioxins are emitted by waste incineration and industrial processes and tests have shown they are found in the bodies of many people living near the incinerators.

They have been identified as the cause of many cancers in a report from the US Environmental Protection Agency.

Economical threat

The debate here o­n alternatives to incinerators has already begun, the latest discussions being in a five-day meeting in Penang earlier this month organised by the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) and the Consumers Association of Penang.

The March 17 meeting drew some 120 activists and scientists from 27 countries.

''If Malaysia builds incinerators, hard-earned capital will leave the country,'' warns prominent anti-incinerator critic Paul Connett, a chemistry professor at St Lawrence University in New York.

Incinerators are not o­nly a threat to health, but also to the local and national economy, he said.

The new incinerators in Malaysia are likely to be funded by soft loans from Japan.

Connett is particularly scathing in his criticism of Japanese promotion of incinerator technology, which he considers dirty technology. He points out that Japan, with some 1,800 municipal waster burners, has three times more incinerators than the rest of the world combined.

To the argument that incinerators are a logical alternative to landfills, especially in land-scarce areas, he asserted: ''If you are asked to choose the lesser of two evils, you have been asked the wrong question.''

Zero waste

Instead, policymakers should be looking at Zero Waste targets and resource recovery for future generations. ''Waste is made by mixing, resources are made by separation,'' he said.

In recent months, activists have stepped up the arguments in favour of incinerators especially after five Swedish campaigners argued that incineration is better for the environment and the economy than recycling.

That view is shared by many British local authorities, who have drawn up plans to build up to 50 incinerators to tackle a mounting waste pile-up.

Critics argue that taxpayers' money would be better spent o­n Zero Waste management policies. For those who argue that such policies cannot be implemented due to local cultural attitudes, Connett is quick to reply that immediate benefits are attainable if organic waste can be separated from other waste material for a start.

He pointed to successful systems in place in Canberra, Australia, and Nova Scotia, Canada, where successful Zero Waste and resource recovery systems have been implemented.

In Nova Scotia, Cornett says a citizen-supported programme there has achieved over 50 percent diversion from landfills and created 3,000 jobs. Jobs are created as industries recycle and reuse scrap paper, cardboard, glass and tyres.

But for all these examples, it remains to be seen if a fresh public outcry will force a rethink of waste management policies in Asian countries such as Malaysia.

"Experts may sharpen the point (on the need for alternatives), but you need the weight of public opinion to hammer it home,'' said Connett. - IPS

.