An ambitious proposal to build a waste-to-energy facility in Fiji that could take in hundreds of thousands of tonnes of trash from Australia and other Pacific countries has sparked a public backlash and claims of “waste colonialism”.
The proposed $900 million incinerator is being touted by Australian billionaire Ian Malouf, and the facility could reportedly supply up to 45 per cent of Fiji’s electricity grid needs, helping end its dependence on fossil fuel imports.
Vuda Point’s incinerator can generate up to 80 megawatts of electricity per year, depending on the amount of trash being burned, and will be powered by a deep-water port.
Local residents are concerned about the environmental impact of the proposed facility at Vuda Point. (Provided by: Facebook/Protect the Heritage Coast – Vuda, Saweni)
Mr Maloof’s business partner, Kookai Fashion Label managing director Robert Krom, said the project was designed to treat Fiji’s household waste first.
“It’s about managing the waste that is already generated within Fiji, such as imported products and waste associated with high levels of tourism, and managing it in a way that reduces the damage to the environment, rather than allowing it to accumulate in dumps, waterways and coastal areas,” Krom told the ABC.
The proposal is being evaluated by the Fijian government and has sparked criticism from nearby residents.
The most prominent critics are the Tui Vuda people, the traditional owners of the area, the Vuda supreme chief, and the female chief of Rauwaki village.
GPS tracking device reveals ‘probably’ illegal e-waste exports
Both have expressed concerns about the project’s environmental impact and want tourism projects, such as a proposed 500-room resort already proposed for development, to move forward instead.
“Fiji depends on tourism and this is what Fiji really wants,” said Hosateki Keri, spokesperson for the Rauwaki Village Chief Women.
“This is what we want, this type of investment that benefits local communities and improves the national economy,” he added.
In a letter to the Fiji Ministry of Tourism, Tui Vuda said the Vuda District “does not approve or support further involvement in the waste-to-energy plant project”.
“The Secretary’s directives demonstrate a firm commitment to rejecting development that threatens our environment and heritage,” the letter said.
Claims of “useless colonialism”
Once realized, the waste-to-energy plant would have the capacity to burn 900,000 tonnes a year, generating electricity from trash from Fiji and trash imported from overseas, including Australia and other Pacific Island countries.
Mr Krom said Fiji generates around 200,000 tonnes of waste annually, but “there is no comprehensive and up-to-date national data set that captures the full scale of waste generation”.
“It is widely understood that the actual amount is significantly higher, taking into account factors such as informal dumping, open burning and waste leakage, but it has not yet been accurately quantified in real time,” he said.
The company says the incinerator burns at over 850 degrees Celsius and turns waste into steam to power wind turbines and generate green electricity in accordance with European Union and environmental protection standards.
Some of the remaining ash could be used for road infrastructure or aggregates, while remaining fly ash would be sent to landfills and metals would be collected for recycling, he said.
Former Flying Fijian and political commentator Randall Kamea described the plan as “wasteful colonialism”.
“No country in the world operates incinerators built primarily to burn other countries’ trash,” Kamea said.
“Australia’s waste will be incinerated on the heritage Buda coast, where our first ancestors arrived over 3,500 years ago…This is not a waste solution for Fiji, it is a waste solution for Australia that is being imposed on Fiji.
“That is the mechanism of waste colonialism.”
Mr Maloof told The Australian he expected the plant would receive more waste from neighboring Pacific countries than from Australia.
The Vuda Saweni region of Fiji holds a special place in history for the neighboring communities. (Provided by: Facebook/Protect the Heritage Coast – Vuda, Saweni)
Ray Wills, an environment professor at the University of Western Australia who has worked on waste-to-energy projects in Australia, said the proposal was not appropriate for Fiji.
“If we have small, modest factories that handle things that can be burned and energy recovered, we can definitely treat the waste that we generate in Fiji,” said Professor Wills, who is also managing director of Future Smart Strategies, a company that advises on renewable energy technologies.
“The problem with actually having a waste-to-energy plant larger than what you normally have in your country is that you become dependent on importing waste from other countries.”
Australia calls for action
Mr Kamea said the Australian government had a duty to ensure the factory was not built, citing the Basel Convention – a 1989 UN treaty aimed at restricting international trade in waste, particularly from developed countries to developing countries – and the Waigani Convention, a Pacific Forum treaty banning the import of hazardous waste.
“This project ceased to be a private commercial contract the moment it collided with the Basel Convention and the Waigani Treaty, both signed by Australia and Fiji,” he said.
“This convention was created in direct response to the dumping of waste by wealthy developed countries into developing countries…this includes household waste.
“Once we start importing waste, we have no control over what comes in containers from other countries… Once it gets here, it becomes our problem.”
In recent months, people have been gathering in waters near the proposed development site to protest the development. (Provided by: Facebook/Protect the Heritage Coast – Vuda, Saweni)
A spokesperson for Australia’s Department of Climate Change, Energy, Environment and Water said in a statement that the department has no jurisdiction over the proposed facility.
The spokesperson added that unsorted household waste is classified as hazardous and Australian authorities have not granted export licenses to Fiji because “Fiji is a Forum Island State and Australia and Fiji are both parties to the Waigani Convention.”
The ABC asked Krom how the factory would function if these agreements were implemented, but did not receive an answer.
Professor Wills suggested that household waste could be reclassified as fuel to avoid a conflict with the convention, but was critical of such a move.
“If this project were to rely on Australian trash shipments, it would be in violation of the very treaty Australia and Fiji signed to prevent the Pacific Ocean from becoming a garbage dump,” he said.
“These agreements aim to stop hazardous waste from being exported to small island states, even if it is burned for energy.
“Calling it ‘fuel’ rather than ‘waste’ doesn’t solve the problem. If it’s waste when it leaves Australia, and it’s a hazardous or difficult-to-control substance, then the spirit and probably the letter of these agreements will say it shouldn’t be sent to a place like Fiji in the first place.”
Professor Wills said it would be cheaper and faster for Fiji to meet its energy needs by building more renewable energy projects, such as solar farms.
Public consultation on the project concluded this week in Fiji.
The Fijian government announced that as of April 20, it had received 207 written submissions in response to the environmental impact assessment and a petition signed by 3,005 people.
