An ambitious proposal to build a waste-to-energy facility in Fiji that could receive hundreds of thousands of tonnes of garbage from Australia and Pacific nations has sparked public backlash and claims of “waste colonialism”.
The proposed $900 million incinerator is being pitched by Australian billionaire Ian Malouf, with the facility reportedly capable of supplying up to 45 per cent of Fiji’s electricity grid needs, helping end its dependence on fossil fuel imports.
The incinerator at Vuda Point could generate up to 80 megawatts of power each year, depending on how much rubbish was burned, and would be serviced by a deep-water port.
Locals are worried about the environmental impact of the proposed facility at Vuda Point. (Supplied: Facebook/Protect the Heritage Coast -Vuda, Saweni)
Mr Malouf’s business partner, Kookai fashion label managing director Robert Cromb, said the project was designed to handle Fiji’s domestic waste first.
“It is about managing waste that is already being generated within Fiji including waste associated with imported products and high visitor numbers and doing so in a way that reduces environmental harm, rather than allowing it to accumulate in open dumps, waterways and coastal areas,” Mr Cromb told the ABC in a statement.
The proposal, which is being assessed by the Fijian government, has triggered condemnation from nearby residents.
The most prominent of the critics are the Tui Vuda, the Paramount Chief of Vuda, and the Lady Chief of Lauwaki village, who are traditional owners of the area.
GPS trackers reveal ‘likely’ illegal e-waste exports
Both have expressed concerns over the environmental impacts of the project and want tourism projects, such as a proposed 500-room resort which has already been pitched for development, to go ahead instead.
“Fiji is relying on tourism and this is what Fiji is actually looking for,” said Josateki Keli, a spokesperson for the Lady Chief for Lauwaki village.
“This is what we want, an investment of this type, which brings in benefits to the local community and uplifts the national economy,” he added.
In a letter to Fiji’s Ministry of Tourism, the Tui Vuda said the Vuda district would “not entertain or endorse any further engagement with the Waste to Energy Factory project”.
“The Chief’s directive represents a decisive stance, rejecting developments that threaten our environment and heritage,” the letter read.
Claims of ‘waste colonialism’
If implemented, the waste-to-energy plant would generate power from rubbish from Fiji and imported from overseas, including Australia and other Pacific Island nations, and have the capacity to burn 900,000 tonnes a year.
Mr Cromb said Fiji generated about 200,000 tonnes of waste a year, but there “is no comprehensive, up-to-date national dataset that captures the full scale of waste generation”.
“When factors such as informal dumping, open burning, and waste leakage are considered, the true volume is widely understood to be significantly higher but not yet precisely quantified in real time,” he said.
The company said the incinerator would burn at more than 850 degrees Celsius, turning rubbish into steam that would propel wind turbines to create green electricity following European Union and environmental protection standards.
It said some remaining ash could be for road base and aggregate, while residual fly ash would go into landfill and metals would be collected for recycling.
Former Flying Fijian and political commentator Randall Kamea described the plan as “waste colonialism”.
“No country in the world runs an incinerator built to primarily burn another nation’s rubbish,” Mr Kamea said.
“Australian waste will be burned on our heritage coast of Vuda, where our first ancestors arrived over 3,500 years ago … this is not a waste solution for Fiji, it’s a waste solution for Australia being imposed on Fiji.
“It is the mechanism of waste colonialism.”
Mr Malouf told The Australian newspaper he expected the plant would take more waste from neighbouring Pacific countries than Australia.
The Vuda-Saweni area in Fiji holds a special place in history for nearby communities. (Supplied: Facebook/Protect the Heritage Coast -Vuda, Saweni)
Ray Wills, an environment professor at the University of Western Australia who has worked with waste-to-energy projects in Australia, said the proposal was not suitable in Fiji.
“Fiji can certainly deal with the waste that’s created in Fiji if you have a small and modest plant that was dealing with the stuff that you can burn and recover energy from,” said Professor Wills, who is also managing director of firm Future Smart Strategies, which advises on renewable energy technologies.
“The problem with actually having a large waste-to-energy plant, larger than what you would normally have in your own country, is that you become reliant on the importation of someone else’s waste.”
Australia called to act
Mr Kamea said the Australian government had a duty to ensure the plant would not be built because of the Basel Convention — a 1989 United Nations treaty aimed at restricting the international trade of waste, particularly from developed to developing nations — as well as the Waigani Convention, a Pacific Forum convention banning the import of hazardous waste.
“This project stopped being a private commercial deal the moment it collided with the Basel Convention and the Waigani Convention that both Australia and Fiji have signed,” he said.
“The conventions were created in direct response to wealthy industrialised countries dumping their waste into developing countries … this includes household waste.
“Once you start importing waste, you can’t control what arrives in containers from other countries … once it arrives here, it’s going to be our problem.”
People have taken to the waters near the proposed site to protest its development in recent months. (Supplied: Facebook/Protect the Heritage Coast -Vuda, Saweni)
In a statement, a spokesperson for Australia’s Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water said it had no jurisdiction over the proposed facility.
The spokesperson added that unsorted household waste was classified as hazardous and that prevented Australian authorities from granting permits to export it to Fiji as “Fiji is a Forum Island Country and both Australia and Fiji are parties to the Waigani Convention”.
The ABC asked Mr Cromb how the plant would work with these conventions in place, but did not receive a response.
Professor Wills suggested that household rubbish could be reclassified as fuel to avoid clashing with the conventions, but was critical of any such move.
“If this project depends on shiploads of Australia’s rubbish, then it runs straight into the very treaties Australia and Fiji signed to avoid the Pacific becoming a dumping ground,” he said.
“Those agreements were designed to stop hazardous waste being exported to small island states, even if you burn it for energy at the other end.
“Calling it ‘fuel’ instead of ‘waste’ doesn’t make the problem go away. If it’s waste when it leaves Australia, and it’s hazardous or hard‑to‑manage material, then the spirit and likely the letter of these agreements say it shouldn’t be sent to places like Fiji in the first place.”
Professor Wills said it would be cheaper and quicker for Fiji to build more renewable energy projects, such as solar farms, to meet its energy needs.
Public consultations on the project ended this week in Fiji.
The Fiji government said as of April 20, 207 written submissions responding to the environmental impact assessment had been received, along with petitions signed by 3,005 people.