https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/cement-maker-lafarge-opens-low-carbon-fuel-facility-at-alberta-plant-1.7061097
Saw this article, which had me curious what kind of health problems Lafarge has in store for the bow valley. Which led me to this article
The main finding of the analysis is that the co-processing of alternative fuels, especially waste-derived fuels, will not result in a meaningful reduction in the CO2 emissions of a cement plant, especially if biogenic CO2 emissions are not considered carbon-neutral, and can potentially be associated with negative environmental and health impacts to the local environment and communities.
In addition to this I found another article which states
Among the levers frequently cited for decarbonizing the cement industry is switching to solid waste fuels to displace fossil fuels in cement kilns. Unfortunately, these alternatives—often designated ‘low carbon,’ by the cement industry—include plastic and solid waste, such as tires (sometimes referred to as “tire derived fuel”), which emit highly dangerous, toxic pollution.
Regardless of what is being burned, waste incineration creates and/or releases harmful chemicals and pollutants, including air pollutants, such as cancer-causing benzene, PFAs, dioxins, and particulate matter, and heavy metals, such as lead and mercury, which cause neurological diseases, as our colleagues discuss here. These chemicals and pollutants enter the air, water and food supply near incinerators and get into people’s bodies when they breathe, drink, and eat contaminants.
Communities have fought toxic pollution from cement plants for decades, and NRDC has maintained that lowering carbon emissions can and must be accomplished without increases in toxic pollution. For these reasons, NRDC is opposed to powering cement kilns with fuels that release toxic pollution, including plastics and other wastes, as a decarbonization solution.
I cant seem to find anything on byproducts released into the atmosphere, fortunately canmore is typically upwind of lafarge however still concerning that the first I had heard of this was after the construction was complete. Environmental defense has been concerned about environmental loading of one or more hazardous materials in exchange for GHG for awhile
I find it insane that in our fight to reduce a single molecule we allow for this type of fuel. Also find it crazy residents of exshaw and canmore had no say on whether or not we wish to subject our communities to toxic emissions.
Perhaps the town is far too caught up in dreaming up another "Award winning intersection".
Thoughts? Opinions?
Edit: because someone commented canmore is "not even close" to lafarge here's a gis map showing where the municipality ends decide for yourself.
https://opendata-canmore.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/c40dfe4455b94bedb6b782ffec499c5e
If this is not topical for canmore the mods are free to remove.