Environmental Groups Sue EPA Over Less Stringent Than Expected Incinerator Emissions Rules: One Third of New York City’s Residential Trash is Incinerated

     A coalition of environmental groups, led by Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project, is suing the EPA over emissions rules for waste incinerators that are weaker than expected. The groups argue that the rule will allow continued harm to communities in Newark and elsewhere in New Jersey, the Hudson Valley, and Long Island.

     One focus of the lawsuit is the Reworld Essex facility in Newark’s Ironbound neighborhood, which burns nearly 1 million tons of trash each year and generates about 66 megawatts of electricity.

     The Cool Down reports:

“Alejandra Torres, the Ironbound Community Corporation's assistant director of advocacy and organizing, said that the Newark incinerator ranks second in New Jersey for emissions of arsenic, hydrogen chloride, mercury, and nitrogen oxide.”

“Residents have long reported foul odors and breathing problems in a neighborhood already surrounded by heavy industry, truck traffic, power plants, and flight paths from Newark Airport.”

     Data from 2024 show that about one-third of New York City’s residential trash—and all of Manhattan’s residential trash—is burned in incinerators. Of Manhattan’s total, 66% is burned at the Newark facility. Incinerator pollution can have serious health effects, including higher cancer risk, developmental harm, and respiratory disease. In Newark’s Ironbound neighborhood, those risks are compounded by other pollution sources, including nearby factories, a sewage treatment plant, diesel truck traffic, and airport emissions. Nitrogen oxide, which contributes to smog, is emitted in greater quantities by the Newark incinerator than by any other source in the county. Community members have opposed the facility for years.

     The EPA’s new rule for municipal solid waste incinerators is stricter than the previous standard but less strict than the version proposed by the Biden administration.

     A lobbyist for the Waste-to-Energy Association defended less stringent rules in general:

“Waste-to-energy facilities serve a real public function: diverting millions of tons of material from landfills, reducing methane emissions and generating reliable electricity.”

     It seems to me that the main issue here is this specific incinerator, since each facility presents different risks depending on surrounding pollution sources, distance from residential areas, and the scale of its emissions. Residents have also long complained about foul odors, underscoring their lived experience of these impacts.

     The long-running debate between landfilling and incineration shows that both approaches have benefits and drawbacks. Because living near an incinerator increases exposure to well-known pollutants, proximity to residents should be a primary factor in permit decisions, emissions limits, and abatement requirements. In other words, allowable emissions should vary based on exposure risk.

 

References:

 

Coalition sues over EPA trash incinerator rules, says Newark families are breathing cancer-causing pollution. Brooklyn Smith. The Cool Down. May 24, 2026. Coalition sues over EPA trash incinerator rules, says Newark families are breathing cancer-causing pollution

Environmentalists hope lawsuit tightens polluting rules for Newark incinerator. Michael Sol Warren. Gothamist. May 17, 2026. Environmentalists hope lawsuit tightens polluting rules for Newark incinerator - Gothamist

IRONBOUND COMMUNITY CORPORATION, EAST YARD COMMUNITIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE, FLORIDA RISING, SIERRA CLUB, and SOUTH BALTIMORE COMMUNITY LAND TRUST, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY and LEE ZELDIN, in his official capacity as Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Respondents. U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. May 11, 2026. 2026-05-11-lmwc-rule-petition-for-review.pdf