The Corporation Commission finally began hearing testimony surrounding a proposed waste incinerator today, after the item was pulled from two previous agendas and was bumped from yesterday’s hearing schedule due to time constraints.

But the commission still hasn’t decided whether it will approve a waiver for Mohave Electric Cooperative that will allow the Western Arizona utility to claim renewable energy credit for energy generated from burning garbage.

Reports from Corporation Commission staff recommended that the project be granted a waiver on the basis that the energy being produced was renewable. The plant would be located in the Phoenix area on a still-undetermined site, but would produce energy to be sent back to customers of the Mohave Electric Cooperative, which serves customers in Bullhead City, Fort Mohave, Mohave Valley, Wikieup, Hackberry, and Peach Springs.

The meeting mostly consisted of Commissioner Paul Newman and attorney Tim Hogan grilling the commission’s staff and other witnesses about what the plant will do and its potential disadvantages.

Newman largely used his questions of staff to highlight his concerns about the project.

“One of the strangest feelings I ever had was to read this proposition. But it wasn’t coming from APS, Salt River Project or Tucson Electric Power – it was coming from Mohave – that wanted to burn garbage in Maricopa County,” Newman said. “Don’t you see this as sort of strange, that this solar co-op from Mohave County with great solar and wind resources has to burn garbage?”

Bradley Angel, executive director of the environmentalist group Greenaction, testified by phone about the air quality hazards of waste incinerators, which environmental groups oppose due to the release of toxic pollutants like dioxin into the air.

But Mohave Electric attorney William Sullivan argued that the incinerators burn at a high enough temperature to eliminate the dioxin, a claim Angel denied.

Sandy Bahr, director of the Grand Canyon chapter of the Sierra Club, also testified against the plant, arguing that, beyond the air quality concerns, it was not an effective way to reduce waste.

“You can’t destroy matter, so you’re still going to have waste that goes into the landfill, plus you’ll have stuff going up in the air,” she said.

And since the plant will need to run constantly, she said it actually incentivizes creating more waste instead of working to reduce the amount of garbage in the first place.

Testimony today had to be cut short by 6:00, but the Commission will be discussing the plant further during a hearing tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. and is expected to take a vote at that time.