plants cause air pollution and threaten human health.

And the move is bound to raise questions among local environmentalists who have objected to Bermuda Government's construction of a mass burn incinerator at Tynes Bay.

"Incineration is a technological quick-fix which creates new environmental problems without solving old ones,'' Ontario Environment Minister Mrs. Ruth Grier said in announcing the ban.

"The legislation we have passed today takes the cautious approach by curtailing the release of toxic chemicals into the air we breathe and the environment we rely on.'' Works Minister the Hon. Clarence Terceira, whose Department is overseeing the building of the $64 million incinerator, was off the Island and unavailable for comment yesterday.

But his stand-in, Environment Minister the Hon. Ann Cartwright DeCouto, questioned the relevance of the Ontario decision given probable differences in Toronto and Bermuda's waste product and relative plant technologies and size.

"The Bermuda Government has a plan to remove toxic elements from the waste stream,'' she said. "There will also be monitoring bodies. A Clean Air Act will set ambient air standards for the (incinerator) emissions.

"I don't think there is any correlation between us and the Canadians,'' she said. "I don't know what degree of industrial waste they're dealing with.

Remember, Toronto is the metropolitan capital of Canada. We're a non-industrial society.

"I suspect their plants were set up long ago and that their technologies are not top-of-the-line.

"As far as I'm concerned, we have through careful thought and planning put up all possible safeguards.'' The Ontario move was hailed by environmental groups and denounced by companies that build garbage incinerators. An Ontario Government press statement said the ban was enacted in response to serious human health and environmental effects, waste management concerns and economic considerations.

Its list of concerns characterised incinerator air emissions a "threat to both human and environmental health.

"Incinerators generate a wide variety of toxic heavy metals and organic contaminants that endanger human health ...

"Solid waste incinerators create large quantities of slag, ash and other solid waste residues. Much of this waste material is contaminated and must be sent to hazardous waste treatment facilities and landfills.'' A nine-page statement called "The Case Against Municipal Solid Waste Incineration'' was issued along with the Ontario Government announcement.

It said: "Even when equipped with the latest emission controls, municipal solid waste incinerators release a wide range of pollutants that may affect human health and the environment.

"Although solid wastes are usually considered non-hazardous, they are contaminated with thousands of potentially dangerous compounds, including used oils and paints, old drugs and pesticides, mercury batteries, glues, solvents, inks and dyes ...

"These pollutants may travel hundreds of kilometres, contributing to global environmental problems, or quickly drift to the ground ...

"It will take decades of intensive research before all the questions about incinerator emissions and their health effects are completely answered.

"In the meantime, it is prudent to avoid high-risk temptation by a quick technological fix to the social and environmental problems of waste disposal.'' In the wake of the Ontario announcement, incinerator proponents rejected the government's thinking.

Mr. Harry Olivier of Ogden Martin Systems Ltd. said the decision was a victory of dogma over science.

He said a plant's toxic emissions can be sharply reduced to levels that are not dangerous.

One environmentalist said the Ontario decision would be used as a precedent not only in the United States but "all over the world''.