Re:Recycling was a lie to sell more plastic, recycling indus...
by theptip on Thursday October 08, 2020 @11:19AM
(#24719895)
I think cleaning up old sites should be prioritized; this is kind of the same commons maintenance as decommissioning old nuclear reactors.
Unfortunately the purely-for-profit structure of these long-term ventures can mean that there is no money to cover the cleanup if things go really wrong, depending on who owns the site. I think you need to look at some sort of cleanup fund in escrow as a precondition for building sites like this, which should incentivize improvements in safety measures too.
Re:Recycling was a lie to sell more plastic, recycling indus...
by FooHentai on Thursday October 08, 2020 @04:11PM
(#24723348)
For sure, I’ve argued for an equivalent of the superfund for NZ previously, and to bring it to bear on site remediations such as this. It’s not a perfect model, but heck it’s better than doing things ad-hoc and asking for point funding, turning things that should have been foreseen and managed over the long term into unpleasant sudden surprises.
Quite a bit more of that kind of thing expected with the increase in extreme weather events from climate change. In Westland alone there are another 12 at-risk old landfill sites. It's estimated that the cost of preventing further spills from the one already-open landfill alone is ~2.3M. In an economically depressed region like Westland it won't be funded, and they're far from the only region in NZ that's facing this problem. Just the first to have experienced a spill event.