EHN
Credit: Aremac/Big Stock Photo
Europe’s push to burn trash for energy faces rising backlash over pollution and debt
Jul 28, 2025
1 min read
PrintPDFEmail
Show audio player
Across Europe, waste-to-energy incinerators once promoted as greener alternatives to landfills are drawing criticism for emitting pollution, locking in debt and potentially becoming obsolete as recycling targets tighten.
Marianne Gros reports for POLITICO.
In short:
Key quote:
“The argument that burning waste is better than landfilling oversimplifies a complex issue. Both practices have serious environmental impacts and neither should be seen as a viable long-term solution.”
— Janek Vahk, senior policy officer at Zero Waste Europe
Why this matters:
Trash-to-energy plants are pitched as a bridge between landfills and a circular economy, but their emissions can mirror those of fossil fuel power stations. Plastic in the waste stream releases carbon dioxide and toxic byproducts when burned, affecting air quality and adding to climate pressures. Many facilities now import waste to stay profitable, extending pollution concerns across borders. As Europe tightens recycling mandates and phases out landfill use, these costly plants risk becoming stranded assets — physical reminders of a waste strategy outpaced by policy and public opinion.
Related: Study links incinerator pollution to toxics in breast milk
●
______________________________________
Peter Anderson, Executive Director
CENTER for a COMPETITIVE WASTE INDUSTRY
5749 Bittersweet Place ● Madison, WI 53705
Email: ande...@competitivewaste.org
Off: (608) 231-1100 ● Cell: (608) 444-2817
Fax: (931) 233-6167
When I was born in 1947, the level of carbon dioxide
in the atmosphere was 310 parts per million, barely
10% more than the 280 ppm in pre-industrial times.
Today, CO2 levels are 415 ppm, 50% greater
than when the Age of the Machine began.
The last time CO2 levels were this high was
2 million years ago, long before our species
evolved and later left Africa, when the world's
seas were nearly 100 feet higher, and global surface
temperature was 11°F warmer, with beech trees at the
South Pole, on a hot house planet incompatable
with human civilization.