Plastic waste burning trial at cement factory prompts backlash

An Adelaide cement factory's plan to burn increased amounts of plastic waste for fuel has sparked significant backlash, with a local council vowing to challenge the decision in court.

“

We have not seen nationwide data of any kind whatsoever that actually explains this is safe for our community, and that's a great concern.

The Adbri cement factory at Port Adelaide, a site long associated with local controversy over emissions, received approval from the SA Environment Protection Authority (EPA) for a six-week trial. This trial permits the factory to use greater quantities of "refuse-derived fuel" (RDF), primarily sourced from the construction sector, which includes a significant plastic component.

While the EPA maintains that emissions are at safe levels, the Port Adelaide Enfield Council is deeply concerned about the long-term health consequences for residents. Mayor Claire Boan stated that the council has not seen sufficient nationwide data to confirm the safety of the process for the community. The council has voted to seek urgent legal advice regarding an injunction on the trial and is demanding independent oversight and 24-hour stack monitoring beyond the EPA's existing measures.

“

RDF is being used because it's of financial benefit to the company.

Residents' groups echo these concerns. Tony Bazeley, a member of the Port Adelaide Residents Environment Protection Group, highlighted that the factory is located just 50 meters from housing and that odor complaints are common. He criticized the company for a lack of transparency regarding its operations and expressed dissatisfaction that results from the trial would not be available until well after its conclusion.

“

The company are not particularly open as to what they're doing, they do put out information but it's very general.

Adbri defended its practice, noting that it has used RDF since the early 2000s, diverting millions of tonnes of waste from landfills and reducing its reliance on fossil fuels. The company asserts that the RDF used in the trial is a highly processed, engineered fuel that meets strict EPA standards. However, these assurances have done little to quell the anxieties of local residents and their representatives, who are pushing for greater certainty regarding environmental and health impacts.

“

The RDF proposed for use in the trial is a highly processed engineered fuel that must meet strict EPA standards and quality controls before it can be used.