Sometimes, when I think of the current Earth I am living in, I wonder how can a problem be solved while bringing some gravy to us. This is one of the thing, I've thought of today-Incineration power plant.

In theory, it is a power plant using garbage as fuel.

Garbages contain polymers which generate dioxins under combustion in O2. With modern incinerator, we should reduce dioxins to trace amount. So if this is taken care of, is it practical?

It already exists. There are hundreds (maybe thousands) or large incineration power plants.

 

Waste incinerator <-- click there for wikipedia about the technology of buring waste

Gas cleaning --< click there for wikipedia about gas cleaning in incinerators, including specific text about dioxins.

The only problem with this, imo, is that people can get the wrong idea that since trash isn't piling up in a landfill and energy is being generated that it suddenly becomes a good idea to throw away as much as you want. You can't generate as much energy by burning trash as it takes to make new stuff to replace the trash, so conserving and recycling with the slowest rate of degradation is more energy effective/efficient in the long-run.

Edited December 9, 201015 yr by lemur

The only problem with this, imo, is that people can get the wrong idea that since trash isn't piling up in a landfill and energy is being generated that it suddenly becomes a good idea to throw away as much as you want. You can't generate as much energy by burning trash as it takes to make new stuff to replace the trash, so conserving and recycling with the slowest rate of degradation is more energy effective/efficient in the long-run.

True.

Most incinerators that I know of have a massive recycling and separation system before the incinerator. But the best way to go is to reduce waste production (reduce consumption).

True.

Most incinerators that I know of have a massive recycling and separation system before the incinerator. But the best way to go is to reduce waste production (reduce consumption).

 

Yes, I think you could actually rate various instances on a continuum of energy-preservation. Cutting the top off a can, poking holes in the bottom, and using it to pot a plant, for example, uses less energy than recycling it by sending it off to a plant to be crushed, melted, and re-formed. Plus you can do that with it anyway after using it as a planter. So, basically, you can take any piece of "trash" and maximize its supply-chain of uses following the moment of retail purchase. Consumerism has somehow created a culture where people think of buying something, using it once, and tossing it - but this is really about the least economically effective/efficient way of utilizing resources. Yes, it promotes revenues and job-creation but the question is whether making more money flow this way does anything except self-perpetuate the culture of waste.