Neither the Climategate scandals nor dropping temperatures nor the futility of CO2 caps will deter the New York Times’s green disciples from their appointed rounds. And so we get an 1,800-word front-page tome from Elizabeth Rosenthal Tuesday telling us that environmentalists' latest answer to a warming planet is . . . garbage-to-energy incinerators.
Really? I used to live right down the street from the Fairfax County municipal incinerator in Alexandria, Va. and it was a constant target of greens and NIMBYs alike — an irony Rosenthal finally figures out in graph 12:
Yet powerful environmental groups have fought the concept passionately. "Incinerators are really the devil," said Laura Haight, a senior environmental associate with the New York Public Interest Research Group.
"Investing in garbage as a green resource is simply perverse when governments should be mandating recycling," she said. "Once you build a waste-to-energy plant, you then have to feed it. Our priority is pushing for zero waste."Even Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who has championed green initiatives and ranked Copenhagen’s waste-fueled heating on his list of environmental "best practices," has shied away from proposing to get one built.
You can’t make this stuff up. The incinerator issue is yet more evidence (like activists who drive nickel-hydride-battery powered Priuses but who oppose nickel mining) that American greens are nihilists.