Eh, if you think about burning garbage displacing burning fossil fuels, it seems to be more or less a carbon neutral act (in that the decision doesn't increase the amount of carbon burned, just switching from burning fossil fuels to making oil into something useful for a little while before burning it. It has the added benefit of not having the things like radioactive soot that burning coal has.

Is burying better than burning? I would bet there's a complex cost-benefit analysis to be done there which might not be all that obvious which one is better.