March 1 is the end of the comment period where signing the petition will do the most good. If there are multiple people in your house hold, have each one sign the petition individually.
I think that the strongest line of defense for the moratorium may be that incinerators will never be a good solution no matter how much research is done. However, if research does eventually find a solution, that would be the time to spend money to build such a system outside the lab, not now.
If right now, 4 tons of waste go in, and 1 ton of ash comes out. This gives the impression that we have just gotten rid of three tons of waste. True, we have gotten it out of the landfill site, but then three tons of pollution went into the air.
If we can barely contain the solid waste pollution runoff in the landfill, why would releasing three tons into the air be better? Other than it gets it out of our sight, and gives it to some place else where the three tons that went into the air settles.
To make an incinerator viable we will have to make the ash and captured residue be a very high percentage by weight of the solid waste that went in. This may save space in the landfill, but the full amount of pollutants will still be in the landfill. The particles will just be much smaller, more solvent, and more easily washed away with rainfall runoff.
Until someone can show that all of these incinerator life cycle problems can be solved in the lab, then there is every reason to keep the moratorium in place and no reason to even go to a model sized system, let alone a full sized system.
Whatever money would be wasted in building a life sized system would be better spent in research in a laboratory. If this research never pans out, think of how much wasteful and useless spending this will have saved us.