The Truth Behind ‘Not Enough Rubbish to Burn’

by Posted on

Foodthink Says

Since the beginning of June, a video titled “From Waste Siege to Not Enough Waste to Burn: China’s Speed Leaves the West Bewildered” has spread rapidly across the internet. The idea of throwing eyesore rubbish into a furnace to burn it all away, then using the released energy for electricity, has left many thrilled by what they see as a “perfect” technical solution. Upon hearing that incineration plants in Zhejiang and Shanghai are “competing with other provinces and cities for waste to burn”, some began to lament: “This news actually lets me use over-packaged products with a clear conscience; I used to feel nothing but guilt.” Perverse notions have even emerged, such as “it’s time to encourage everyone to throw away more rubbish” or “stop sorting waste, just haul it all away to be burned”. Given the breadth and intensity of the misleading influence this video has generated, in the 51st episode of the “Food Talk” podcast, we invited two senior experts from the fields of waste management and environmental public welfare to discuss exactly what is going on with this “lack of waste to burn”. How should we actually view waste incineration? What is its relationship with waste sorting and recycling? Can current incineration safety technologies truly prevent the production of dioxins and other toxic emissions and atmospheric pollutants? What are the hazards of plastic food packaging to the human body? And how can each of us build our own relationship with waste to work together towards creating a “Zero-Waste Planet”?

This article is a summary of the content from that podcast episode.

Guests

Mao Da

PhD in Environmental History, Chairperson of the Shenzhen Zero Waste Environmental Protection Public Welfare Development Centre, and initiator of the “Non-Toxic Pioneer” action. For twenty years, he has been involved in solid waste and environmental health projects across multiple environmental organisations. His current work focuses on sound chemical management, the greening of e-commerce, plastic waste pollution control, and the practical promotion of zero-waste concepts.

 

 

 

Sun Jinghua

Natural name “Lianpeng”, Director of the Waste Reduction Project at Friends of Nature, and chief editor of the popular science book *The Magic Book of Waste*. For many years, she has conducted extensive educational and outreach work in the fields of waste reduction and sorting, as well as campus zero-waste initiatives.

 

 

 

Yu Yang

Editor at Foodthink, who has recently been reflecting on the toxic relationship between plastics and humans.

 

 

 

 

Host

Chang Tianle

Founding editor of Foodthink and convenor of the Beijing Organic Farmers Market.

 

 

 

 

 

I. Why are people excited about “not enough waste to burn”?

Tianle: You may have noticed a very popular video recently claiming that China no longer has enough waste to burn. Some people then suggested that since there’s a shortage, perhaps it doesn’t matter if we produce more waste to support these incineration plants; some even claimed this was the best news they’d heard all year, as it eases the guilt of producing rubbish. Data shows that as of 2023, China has built over 1,000 waste-to-energy plants, and its waste incineration capacity far exceeds the combined totals of the US, Japan, and Europe. I’d like to ask the three of you: how do you view this viral topic?Mao Da: To start with, I strongly disagree with the video’s perspective. I feel the creator doesn’t truly understand waste incineration, nor the complete picture of waste management; after all, incineration is just one technical means of waste management. However, looking at it from another angle, does the creator’s understanding of waste reflect the psychology of the general public? For a long time, many people have been indifferent to waste. Then suddenly, a counter-intuitive argument appears: waste is no longer a “siege” problem, but rather a shortage. That is naturally going to attract attention and be shared. Another reason is that the video deliberately links this to elements of national pride. Furthermore, many people have always felt that waste sorting is too inefficient. From the perspective of pursuing economic gain and efficiency, this video sends a signal: waste incineration is not only incredibly efficient but also profitable. Combined, these points have made the video go viral.

Yu Yang: I believe the creator is called “Technology Sima“. I visited his homepage and noticed he generally explores technology from the perspective of an “industrialist”. However, aside from this “not enough waste to burn” video and another one about “AI lasers replacing pesticides”, his other videos haven’t gained much traction. The reason this particular video garnered so much attention—causing a public that has long been impatient with waste disposal to suddenly praise incineration—is perhaps because waste incineration represents a simple, brute-force solution. Regardless of the material, everything can be thrown into the furnace and burned away. There is a certain sense of catharsis in that.

◉ Some netizens believe that waste incineration technology is leading society “towards a clean modernisation”. Image source: Screenshot from WeChat Video Account
Tianle: Maoda mentioned just now that the general public might be quite indifferent to the relationship between waste and me, but there are actually many ordinary people who care about environmental issues and are willing to take practical action in their own lives. I know that Friends of Nature has always encouraged the public to focus on environmental protection. Lianpeng, could you tell us how this issue has been received within the Friends of Nature community?Lianpeng: I first saw this video on Weibo. I noticed that the people in the repost chain were all positive influencers from various fields, yet they all seemed to approve of the video; this surprised me. Waste incineration is common knowledge within environmental circles, but for the general public—even influencers who are highly professional in other areas—it is very easy to be swayed by the prevailing narrative.

Immediately after, many people sent me private messages on WeChat asking, “Have you seen this video? Is it really like that?” A number of them had even participated in our teacher training on waste and life. I told them, “I taught you for two or three days; how could you have forgotten the basic knowledge? Think about our priority hierarchy: incineration is second to last; it’s simply a method of disposal that is slightly better than landfill or indiscriminate dumping.”

II. Is there really not enough waste to burn?

Maoda: Is it because there is less waste that incinerators aren’t getting enough to burn? No. Currently, the estimated annual amount of waste per person in Beijing that needs incineration is over 200kg. In Shanghai, it’s even higher, estimated at over 290kg per year. What does this mean? Compare this to Seoul, South Korea, where the concept of ‘zero waste’ has been implemented quite well for many years; now, the combined total of incineration and landfill in Seoul is approximately 100kg per person per year. We produce too much waste, but we have even more incineration plants. Currently, there is overcapacity in incineration plants. While it’s appropriate to maintain a certain margin of spare capacity, it has reached the point where plants are competing for waste, which is certainly irrational.

Tianle: Just by observing our own lifestyles or those around us—for example, the countless disposable cups from milk tea shops and the various plastic packagings from takeout and deliveries—one can feel that the volume of waste people produce is constantly increasing. So why has China built so many waste incineration plants?

◉ Waste became a problem that China had to face and address during its process of modernisation and urbanisation. The shock and fear brought about by the former “Waste Surrounding the City” phenomenon prompted people to seek a solution that could resolve waste problems quickly and efficiently. Image source: Stills from “Waste Surrounding the City”
Lianpeng: It’s actually because there was no more room for landfill. Over ten years ago, the documentary about “Waste Surrounding the City” in Beijing was very famous. If you can’t bury it, what do you do? Incineration was a means of “technological progress” born out of necessity. However, for instance, if building three incineration plants could burn all the city’s waste, but half of that waste consists of food waste or recyclables, then building two plants would actually suffice.

III. Can incinerators control dioxin emissions?

Yuyang: The video mentioned that while waste incineration produces dioxins, under current incineration technology, these carcinogenic substances are decomposed at high temperatures of 1,100 degrees. Is that correct? Maoda: That’s why I say this blogger doesn’t understand incineration. Even at over 1,000 degrees, although we have real-time monitoring, there are many conditions that lead to the production of dioxins. It’s not just temperature; there are many invisible factors. For example, if the furnace ash is not cleaned in time, it can also contribute to the production of dioxins.

Lianpeng: Some friends asked me if dioxin emissions can all be controlled now, and if I’d heard that real-time monitoring is maintained. I told them that incinerators are tested for dioxin emissions at least once a year—does that count as real-time monitoring?

Maoda: In reality, to comprehensively and truthfully grasp the state of dioxin emissions from incineration, periodic or semi-continuous sampling monitoring is required. But the statutory emission monitoring is only once a year, and with voluntary monitoring added, it’s at most three or four times a year. Nowadays, many places may be unwilling to conduct monitoring due to cost issues, or they stop doing it once the monitoring exposes problems. But when we look at scientific literature, we find that the accumulation of dioxins in the soil around certain incineration plants has risen relative to control sites, and dioxin concentrations in the air in some areas tend to be high.

Lianpeng: In 2020, Friends of Nature sued an incineration plant called Daji in Jiangsu because its pollution emissions did not meet the standards, and we won. If we could resolve the issue of every non-compliant incineration plant through legal channels, things might be better. China’s incineration technology has indeed progressed in terms of safety compared to ten years ago, but the problem is that there are now too many incineration plants.

◉ Distribution of waste-to-energy plants in some regions of China. Relevant data shows that by 2023, China had built over 1,000 waste-to-energy plants, with 2,172 incinerators and an incineration capacity of approximately 1.11 million tonnes per day. This increase in capacity means that China’s waste incineration volume far exceeds the combined totals of the US, Japan, and Europe. Image source: Public Data Platform for Automatic Monitoring of Municipal Waste Incineration Power Plants
Maoda: Actually, the government has carried out monitoring work within the regulations. But that doesn’t mean these emissions from incineration plants are guaranteed to be safe, because the standards themselves need to be constantly adjusted and improved. When I first encountered the issue of incineration emissions, the dioxin emission limit was 1 nanogram per cubic metre, but that didn’t guarantee public health and safety. So, following public appeals and the industry’s own efforts, this emission standard became 0.1 nanograms a few years later. This is a process, but we cannot say that current standards are definitively safe; it’s simply a balance.

IV. Why is incineration not a panacea?

Tianle: I’d like to ask Dr Maoda to give us a brief explanation of why incineration is the last choice for waste treatment? Maoda: First, let’s talk about the 3R priority hierarchy for waste treatment: reduce, reuse, and recycle. First is reduce; avoiding the production of waste is, of course, the optimal choice. Second is reuse; extending the lifespan of existing items to reduce the amount discarded or wasted also reduces waste. Third is recycle; making an effort to let waste be recycled and regenerated, such as turning waste paper and plastic into new objects. Only when there is absolutely no other way does waste enter end-of-pipe disposal like incineration.

◉ Priority of waste treatment methods. Image source: Maoda

Tianle: And there is always waste that isn’t suitable for incineration, such as glass or food waste.

Maoda: Yes. Waste incineration directly burns carbon-containing substances and emits them as greenhouse gases. As we all know, extreme weather is becoming so frequent; food waste is what should be burned the least, because the things we eat are primarily carbohydrates, which become greenhouse gases when burned. Additionally, plastics and wood are rich in carbon, so burning them also emits greenhouse gases. If we don’t implement these sorting and recycling processes—if we just buy, use, and throw away whatever we want, and everything goes into incineration plants or landfills—the consequences will be something we simply cannot afford.

◉ Pollutants that may be produced by waste incineration. Source: Tianxia Wufen
Tianle: From a climate change perspective, waste management is something that affects every one of us. Some recent data suggests that people born after 2020 are highly likely to experience extreme heatwaves during their lifetime. Lianpeng: Glass bottles are a particular headache for me. It is relatively fine in Beijing, as bottles from common local brands like Yanjing, Beibingyang, and Sanyuan Milk can be returned. However, this service is currently only available for local brands. For non-local brands, for instance, the milk I saw in Suzhou was from New Hope and had been transported from Hangzhou. Those glass bottles couldn’t be recycled, so they just became single-use, which is a terrible waste of resources.

Tianle: Yes, I’ve noticed that the waste collectors in my residential complex don’t take glass bottles either.

Maoda: But incineration plants can’t burn glass bottles either. Incineration isn’t a cure-all; we must consider whether a material is actually suitable for incineration. For things like glass, we should be thinking about how to improve reuse and extend their lifespan—essentially returning them to the factory for refilling. You can tell if a glass bottle has been reused by looking for scuff marks on the outside.

Tianle: In terms of food safety, glass is considered far superior to plastic for food packaging, so it is a real shame it has such a major flaw.

Lianpeng: It’s actually because the cost of glass is so low that manufacturers would rather use new bottles than recycle them; the processing cost for recycling can be very high.

V. Health Risks of Plastic Food Packaging

Tianle: When people believe that incineration allows them to create waste without guilt, they often overlook the fact that much of this waste comes from our plastic food packaging, and these plastics are harmful to our own health. Setting aside packaged foods, even in wet markets and supermarkets, vegetables and fruits are wrapped in layers of plastic. Plastic is so ubiquitous in our food; how safe is it really?

◉ Various fruits and vegetables frequently over-packaged in plastic at fresh food supermarkets. Source: Foodthink
Maoda: Regarding food plastics, microplastics have likely become a familiar topic for everyone recently. A new study emerges every few days, causing a wave of panic. But even if microplastics are truly problematic, the world cannot simply quit plastic packaging, and the public will eventually become indifferent. When these microplastics enter our organs or even reach the cellular level, they can produce unpredictable effects. If we wait until then to stop the intake of microplastics, it will be too late. Tianle: I’m the same. I love drinking Earl Grey tea in the morning, but it’s hard to find loose-leaf tea in China. Since learning about the dangers of microplastics, I’ve started opening up tea bags to brew the leaves. Many bio-based packages claiming to be made from corn starch, as well as the biodegradable PLA straws used in bubble tea shops, actually contain many chemical additives to bind them or alter their properties.

Maoda: PLA is a relatively degradable material, but additives are often added to give it specific functions, including substances that are difficult to degrade or carry endocrine-disrupting and carcinogenic risks. Additives in food packaging can contaminate the food. Researchers in North America often conduct experiments where they eat Western fast food in single-use plastic packaging every day for several weeks, only to find that the intake of plastic-related additives is far higher than in a normal diet.

Compared to microplastics, the health hazards of chemical additives are more scientifically established, as certain high-risk substances are intentionally added. For example, phthalate plasticisers have a clear impact on endocrine disruption, acting as artificial oestrogens. If children ingest these plastic additives, it can lead to precocious puberty in girls and abnormal development of reproductive organs in boys. We know a doctor at a maternal and child health hospital in Hangzhou who found that the increase in cases of hypospadias in boys in recent years may be linked to this. Then there is BPA, which everyone is now familiar with; it is also an endocrine disruptor that affects female reproductive health.

Tianle: I feel that trying to quit the reliance on plastic packaging is like quitting smoking or drinking. Everyone understands the logic, but the distance from awareness to action is very long. Moreover, the impact of these plastics on health is subtle and insidious.

Maoda: Exactly. Parents today know to choose BPA-free plastic baby bottles, but there are other things we don’t understand. For example, the PVC Type 3 commonly found in mooncake and egg trays has the strongest reliance on additives. People may also be unaware that during the industrial production of pre-prepared meals, some harmful substances are present in the plastic piping used for processing.

Those who enjoy baking should be careful; cheap mooncake trays bought online may be made of PVC. Cling film now also exists as both PVC and non-PVC versions. The state stipulates that PVC plastic packaging cannot be used for materials in contact with meat, oil, or fats, but how are ordinary people supposed to tell the difference in their daily lives? It’s far too difficult.

VI. New Plastic Pollution from Takeaway Packaging

Tianle: Yuyang, you worked as a delivery driver for a few months. Did you feel then that the plastic waste from takeaways was a problem? Yuyang: To be honest, while delivering, my main concern was whether the packaging was secure. For delivery drivers and merchants, the priority is ensuring the food reaches the customer safely. That is the dilemma of ordering takeaways: you have to deal with a massive amount of plastic packaging, including plastic boxes and the cling film wrapped around the lids.

Then there is the issue of disposable cutlery. Whenever I order takeaways, I select ‘no cutlery’, but merchants still send it. It might be because merchants are too busy during the lunch rush and don’t check the notes—taking a glance might delay a packing order—or they fear negative reviews if they don’t provide cutlery, so they just follow a standardised process.

◉ Takeaway waste, a common sight in daily life. Source: Foodthink

Lianpeng: Takeaway bags are generally composite bags now. Because the state restricts merchants from providing non-biodegradable plastic bags—meaning the common carrier bags with handles are effectively banned and merchants can be fined for providing them—merchants have had to find replacements. One is non-woven fabric, and the other is biodegradable plastic. However, biodegradable bags are soft and not sturdy; they break or tilt easily, causing food to spill. This is where composite bags stepped in. They provide support and look better, but from a waste management perspective, they are far worse than ordinary plastic bags. Waste collectors won’t even take composite bags because they contain a mix of plastic, non-woven fabric, and sometimes aluminium foil, making them very difficult to separate and reuse. Non-woven fabric bags, by contrast, are made of a single material and are relatively easier to process.

Tianle: So now takeaways are not only causing a flood of conventional plastics but are also creating many new types of packaging waste that are difficult to process.

Maoda: Yes, they are ‘new pollutants’ in another sense. Since they are so hard to recycle, the only option is to take them to be incinerated.

Lianpeng: I’m a ’70s child who grew up in the hutongs of Beijing. Back then, we had a term for taking out the rubbish called ‘dumping the soil’ (dao tu), which meant the waste consisted mainly of ash, cinder, and dust. When I was young, things like glass bottles and toothpaste tubes were all recyclable. Now, the types of waste have become increasingly ‘diverse’, with more and more non-recyclable packaging. Even these low-value recyclables are no longer collected.

◉ Non-recyclable plastic packaging eventually disperses across mountains and rivers, potentially travelling up the food chain to return to our dinner tables and, ultimately, into our bodies. Image source: Maoda
Lianpeng:Xiamen is currently the gold standard for handling low-value recyclables. Plastic packaging is collected daily by the municipality, with dedicated companies ensuring it is processed correctly downstream. Xiamen also collects glass and ceramics separately. Elsewhere in China, ceramics are classified as ‘other waste’, but in Xiamen, they are grouped with glass and recycled into construction materials or used for road surfacing. In Xiamen’s residential complexes, I’ve noticed there are roughly three times as many blue recycling bins as there are grey general waste bins. Moreover, the glass and ceramic bins actually contain only glass and ceramics. I truly admire Xiamen’s model and want to commend the local government.

VII. Moving beyond blunt waste incineration

Maoda:The competition between Chinese incineration plants has become such a ‘race to the bottom’ that the processing fee for a tonne of waste can drop to as low as ten or twenty yuan. I believe the government must address this predatory pricing, as it drives down the overall cost of waste treatment to a level that fails to reflect the true cost of producing that waste. Currently, the fees charged for processing a tonne of waste in China are very low—around 100 yuan, or perhaps two or three hundred at most. For a similar level of consumption, Taiwan charges around 400 to 500 yuan per tonne, Japan 800, and Europe 1,000. This is where the fees should realistically be. Professor Song Guojun of Renmin University of China once calculated the total social cost of waste treatment, including health costs—such as the cancer risk posed by pollutants from incineration, converted into economic loss through a model. It comes to roughly 2,000 yuan per tonne. Only when these social costs are accounted for will there be a real incentive across society to push for waste reduction and reuse.

Tianle:Hearing this, it feels incredibly unfair. A small, non-profit venture like our Beijing Organic Farmers’ Market is willing to invest time and labour into reducing plastic and promoting reuse, yet large corporations are unwilling to do the same.

◉ To promote the reduction of single-use plastic packaging, the Beijing Organic Farmers’ Market has established a ‘bulk zone’ where customers are required to bring their own containers. Image source: Beijing Organic Farmers’ Market

Tianle:We never hand out new bags; instead, we encourage customers to bring their own, which we then collect and provide free of charge to other customers. Additionally, some of the egg farmers at the Organic Market use paper trays and rice husk packaging, which are very easy to recycle. Of course, some farmers still use polystyrene inserts for the eggs inside cardboard boxes. Even so, as long as the customers return the packaging to the shop, we gather it all and send it back to the farmers for reuse. It really comes down to whether the merchant has the heart and is willing to invest the cost—packing is a labour cost, and sending it back is a courier cost.

◉ Second-hand bag collection area. Image source: Beijing Organic Farmers’ Market

Tianle: In contrast, large supermarket chains like Hema and JD could easily set up recycling areas to collect the many unnecessary boxes generated during shopping. If these boxes are clean, the supermarkets could collect and return them to the manufacturers for reuse, benefiting from economies of scale. Fresh food e-commerce platforms like Hema and Xiaoxiang essentially have their own delivery fleets; they could easily collect bags from customers while delivering goods. I remember SF Express had a cold-chain service where they took the cold-chain boxes back upon delivery—that was a good approach.

Lianpeng:Yes, they could even consider a one-yuan deposit for every box. After purchasing, customers could unpack it on the spot, bring it back a few days later, or even have the delivery driver collect it to get their deposit back. Nature Friends published an article on 30 March specifically discussing some ‘creative ideas’ to reduce packaging on fresh food platforms. For example, by scheduling delivery times in advance to ensure the customer is home, the delivery driver could hand the items directly to the customer without needing a bag.

Some of Hema’s practices are also irrational and need to change: they stipulate that for online purchases, even if you collect them in-store, the items must be put in a bag, and you’re charged a one-yuan packaging fee. You can apply for a refund, but many people aren’t aware of this rule. Some of their coupons are also problematic—some can only be used online, forcing consumers to order via the app. Then there are the boxes; Hema uses so many. Its name is quite literal—’He’ means box, and it’s all boxes. You can’t choose not to buy them, you can’t return them, and even if you unpack them on the spot and give them back, they just end up being thrown away.

◉ The ‘Postal Slow-Delivery’ initiative launched by Free U Nature uses cycling to keep second-hand bags in circulation, providing them to merchants in need and thereby reducing the consumption of plastic packaging. Image source: Free U Nature
Mao Da: From a public management perspective, we often focus on managing the ‘process’—for example, requiring people to sort waste or regulating how merchants should operate. The problem is that this often places a heavy burden on small businesses and producers, while the large corporations that generate the most waste find it far easier to ‘comply’. In reality, they are the primary source of waste, yet the system fails to hold them truly accountable. Therefore, we need ‘outcome-based’ management: whoever produces the most waste, whether an individual or a company, should pay more. The government is already moving in this direction, but implementation hasn’t been thorough enough, perhaps for fear of alienating the general public.

VIII. Establishing a Connection Between Ourselves and Our Waste

Tian Le: Finally, I’d like to ask everyone: what do you think each of us can do to reduce waste and improve our quality of life, while benefiting our own health, the health of others, and the environment? Lian Peng: Reducing waste at the source is the most critical step. In fact, any bag becomes an eco-bag as long as you reuse it. Also, try to limit your reliance on takeaways and online shopping; if you really don’t have time to cook, try dining in. Then there is bubble tea, which comes with so much unnecessary packaging; drink less of it, or bring your own cup.

Mao Da: Our advocacy is ‘Zero Waste’, summed up in a simple mantra: buy better, buy less, make it last. Of course, waste will always be generated, and circular economy principles can solve many problems. Leaders in organisations or units can take the lead in experimenting, creating a small system to inspire others. I know a sanitation services company that set up a small vegetable garden on their rooftop for a closed-loop composting system. Organisations like Nature Friends and many of our peers can provide technical support, so you don’t have to start from scratch. We also welcome support for our environmental organisations—Foodthink, Nature Friends, and Shenzhen Zero Waste. By becoming monthly donors, you help us make these goals a reality.

Ultimately, we must establish a connection between ourselves and our waste. Our original pain point was simply ‘not wanting rubbish piling up at our doorstep’. But now that waste is whisked away so quickly, we have overlooked the value of sanitation workers. We need to realise that waste is not ‘someone else’s problem’, but something intimately connected to us all.

Yu Yang: I agree with Mr Mao Da that we need to link waste to our lives, but establishing that link is indeed difficult. Take ‘ordering takeaways’, for example. We’ve interviewed people who don’t do it on a whim; it’s entwined with the overall pace of their work and life. Many have to work overtime after their shift ends; they’re exhausted and have no time to cook, so they simply order a takeaway while on the Tube. Unless we change this rhythm of life, it’s hard to change the behaviour.

Another thing that comes to mind is reuse. Nowadays, people see reuse as a somewhat avant-garde lifestyle—for instance, turning scrap fabric into a backpack is a form of reuse, and there’s even that kind of collage art in the art world. But when I was a child, my grandmother used to patch my clothes just like that; for a traditional way of life, this kind of reuse was simply life itself. So I believe that if we can truly integrate this concept of circularity into daily life until it becomes second nature, changing our actions will become much easier.

◉ Pictured: A backpack made from discarded bicycle inner tubes. Environmental concepts are expressed through similar artistic products, but these are becoming increasingly removed from the daily lives of the general public. Photo: Yu Yang

Compiled by: Li Ye

Edited by: Yu Yang

Published by Foodthink