Why REM’s Proposal is Wrong for Port Hope

This document can be downloaded at
http://phr4mwr.ca/word_docs/WHY REM’S INCINERATOR IS WRONG FOR PORT HOPE v.2.docx



Produced by Port Hope Residents 4 Managing Waste Responsibly (MWR)

A private company named Renewable Energy Management (REM) is proposing to build a large garbage incinerator in Port Hope.
Here are just some of the reasons why REM’s incinerator is wrong for Port Hope:




  • REM has never built or operated an incinerator or any other type of waste disposal facility. The company has no track record.i


  • The “Entech-gasification” technology REM proposes to use in Port Hope has never been used in North America or Western Europe.ii


  • REM notes in its own press release on the proposed Port Hope facility, that they have “a steep hill to climb”, because while this technology is being used in Poland, Malaysia and Singapore, “these countries may not have as tough environmental standards as exist here in Ontario.”iii




  • There are serious health concerns surrounding this type of incineration technology which produces emissions that contain toxic substances like lead, mercury, furans and dioxins and fine particulate matter all of which can have a serious negative impact on human health.iv


  • One particular concern with REM’s proposed technology for the Port Hope facility is the release of dangerous nanoparticles into the air we breathe.v




  • The incinerator proposed for Port Hope would be by far the largest in the world using this technology.vi


  • REM has repeatedly stated that the Port Hope plant would process 540,000 tonnes of garbage per year.vii Recently, REM has stated it only intends to process 200,000 tonnes per year, but still refers to this as “phase 1” of the project.viii


  • The vast majority of the waste would be trucked in from outside of Port Hope, and outside of Northumberland County.Port Hope produces less than 5,200 tonnes of municipal waste per year. All of Northumberland County combined produces less than 35,000 tonnes of municipal waste per year.ix


  • REM has confirmed that the garbage for the incinerator will come from “within 100km of the facility”x, which includes the Greater Toronto Area. Hundreds of trucks a week bringing garbage into Port Hope.xi




  • While REM claims its proposal is not for an incinerator but for a “waste gasification” plant, a waste gasification plant falls within the definition of an incinerator, as defined by the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment.xii




  • Port Hope council has just spent over $100,000 to re-brand our town and protect it from the stigma of toxic waste.xiii Trucking hundreds of thousands of tonnes of other communities’ garbage into Port Hope to be incinerated blatantly contradicts this re-branding effort.


  • Port Hope’s reputation, along with tourism, local business, and property values will suffer from having a large garbage incinerator in the community.


  • Because of these concerns, other municipalities in Ontario have said no to hosting REM’s incinerator. Brant County Mayor Rob Eddy said no to a similar proposal from REM, stating that his county “didn’t want to be guinea pigs.”

About us: Port Hope Residents 4 Managing Waste Responsibly (MWR)

MWR was formed in October 2012 when a group of Port Hope residents came together, united by serious concerns about a proposed project by a private company named Renewable Energy Management (REM) to build a large garbage incinerator in Port Hope. Our Mission Statement is: Protecting our environment from the impact of waste incineration, which threatens our health, prosperity and our “community’s unique appeal”.xiv


On January 31 2013 REM applied to the municipality of Port Hope for the required municipal approval of the project. In the coming months town council will vote on whether or not to approve REM’s proposal.

NOW is the critical time to let municipal representatives know how you feel about REM’s proposal to truck in and incinerate hundreds of thousands of tonnes of garbage in Port Hope. In a few months, it may be too late.


Please contact Port Hope’s Mayor and Council and tell them that you do not support bringing a garbage incinerator into our community.

Contact Port Hope’s Mayor and Councillors:

Mayor Linda Thompson (Ward 1) mayor@porthope.ca
Deputy Mayor Jeff Gilmer (Ward 2) jgilmer@porthope.ca
Councillor Rick Austin (Ward 1) raustin@porthope.ca
Councillor Greg Burns (Ward 2) gburns@porthope.ca
Councillor Mary Lou Ellis (Ward 1) mellis@porthope.ca
Councillor Jeff Lees (Ward 1) Jlees@porthope.ca
Councillor David Turck (Ward 1) dturck@porthope.ca

For more information please visit MWR’s website at: www.phr4mwr.ca

Or contact us at: PortHope4MWR@gmail.com


i See REM’s “Wesleyville Q&A” document, pg. 16. Available at: http://rem-wesleyville.ca/projectInformation.html


ii Northumberland News (November 19 2009). Available at: http://www.northumberlandnews.com/news/article/1088626–low-temperature-gasification-plant-planned-for-port-hope


iii 2009 REM Press Release: “Port Hope energy-from-waste plant has hurdles to jump”, available at http://www.rem-energysolutions.com/Press.html


iv See Dr. Stan Blecher’s analysis of REM’s proposal, available at: http://www.phr4mwr.ca/health-concerns/


v See Dr. Stan Blecher’s analysis of REM’s proposal, available at: http://www.phr4mwr.ca/health-concerns/


vi See REM’s “Wesleyville Q&A” document, pg. 17. Available at: http://rem-wesleyville.ca/projectInformation.html


vii See Display Board 9 at http://www.rem-wesleyville.ca/OpenHouse.html , also see: http://www.solidwastemag.com/news/the-wesleyville-project/1000382977/


viii See Display board 9 at http://www.rem-wesleyville.ca/OpenHouse2.html


ix Information received from Adam McCue, Manager Waste Technician – Northumberland County.


x See REM’s “Wesleyville Q&A” document, pg. 6. Available at: http://rem-wesleyville.ca/projectInformation.html


xi See REM’s “Wesleyville Q&A” document, pg. 5. Available at: http://rem-wesleyville.ca/projectInformation.html


xii Please see the following CCME documents: 2007 Review of Dioxins and Furans from Incineration In Support of a Canada-wide Standard Review and http://www.ccme.ca/assets/pdf/d_and_f_standard_e.pdf) Also note that a recent Northumberland News editorial stated that despite the title of “gasification plant”, REM’s proposed plant is in fact a “low-heat incinerator”. http://www.northumberlandnews.com/print/1550158


xiii Northumberland Today (March 14, 2012) see: http://www.northumberlandtoday.com/2012/03/14/re-branding-in-port-hope


xiv *Port Hope Branding Statement, approved by Town Council September 2012:“Port Hope is anything but ordinary. It happily goes its own way. Port Hope is an urban-rural paradise powered by strength of character. Heritage architecture, industry and culture nestle in a river valley extending through miles of striking natural landscapes. Port Hope’s secret ingredient is its people — an eclectic mix of passionate individuals who protect the community’s unique appeal. They love life, celebrate individuality, challenge the norm and deliver the unexpected.”