[chihuahua]

Perhaps burning trash would be the better solution. But it seems fairly unpopular with people in general, at least in the U.S. - you can imagine how easy it is to generate violent opposition to put a trash-burning facility in any place.

An acquaintance of mine from high school for some reason devoted much of his life to promoting trash burning technology. It seems like a good cause, but a futile one.

[sgerenser]

Trash incineration plants (referred to as “waste-to-energy” which sounds like an accurate euphemism to me) definitely generate very strong negative reactions in the U.S. I used to live just a couple miles away from one in Syracuse NY and I thought it was a great idea... recycle and reuse what you can, and everything else gets cleanly incinerated and generates electricity at the same time. There was no detectable smell either. Being supportive of the plant definitely put me in the minority based on all the negative feedback I read online and in the local newspaper.

[chihuahua]

I think burning PVC can produce dioxin, which would be very bad if it's not filtered out from the exhaust. Then it depends on how much you trust the facility to have an effective filter installed, and test and maintain it diligently. That costs money, so there will be a tendency to skip the maintenance.

[Tuna-Fish]

No. Only partial combustion of PVC produces dioxins. Proper incineration plants do not produce any. So the solution is not filters, but hotter combustion.