Anti-incinerator campaigners gather at Javelin Park

“Bonkim 2003, thank you for your comment and i have taken on board what you have said. Hopefully there will be smaller sub contract packages that local builders to Gloucester can sink their teeth in to. Its far greater to look at the positives of this project rather than the negatives.”

“Chambers Builders - the extent of work by local contractors on the civil engineering and minor construction work will be small beer - the bulk of the main civil, structural works, and plant contracts will be mainly outside sources, and also specialised erection personnel. All major companies make pronouncements conducive to good PR - means nothing unless the objectives are written in the contracts. What has Glos CC stipulated? Has the county skilled personnel to build an EFW - and what good is a meeting between local building firms and the main developer. A few scraps does not justify the high costs of the project, not that I am against EFW plants.”

“Shireling - Urbaser Balfour Beatty have already promised to use local contractors, check out my meeting with them on http://tinyurl.com/cllggop . As I said, they are the perfect partnership to take this forward. We've worked with Belfour Beatty for over 4 years and from personal experience I know that health & safety is paramount to them, hence their motto, 'zero harm' . So let the local economy bloom with the extra jobs and extra growth. #HappyDaysForGloucester”

“Ysedra - the untried/under development technology was thermal gasification of RDF which was supposed to provide some advantage in comparison with straight combustion of RDF in EFWs. Large gasifiers are still under development, and will complicate the overall waste treatment route even more, and increase costs. Note the RDF produced at the MBT plant at Avonmouth sends its RDF to EFW plants T Marchwood or Portsmouth.”

“Ysedra - the untried/under development technology was thermal gasification of RDF which was supposed to provide some advantage in comparison with straight combustion of RDF in EFWs. Large gasifiers are still under development, and will complicate the overall waste treatment route even more, and increase costs. Note the RDF produced at the MBT plant at Avonmouth sends its RDF to EFW plants T Marchwood or Portsmouth.”

“Ysedra - the untried/under development technology was thermal gasification of RDF which was supposed to provide some advantage in comparison with straight combustion of RDF in EFWs. Large gasifiers are still under development, and will complicate the overall waste treatment route even more, and increase costs. Note the RDF produced at the MBT plant at Avonmouth sends its RDF to EFW plants T Marchwood or Portsmouth.”

“Interesting points, Bonkim2003. I recalled that 'untried technology' was the objection to MBT, but I may have confused that with one of the other alternatives put forward by opponents. Pyrolosis, perhaps, or gasification?

There are few easy answers on this subject, but one of them is the answer to the question, 'Did Labour propose building an incinerator when they were in charge of the county council?' It's an answer which undermines the argument that all the Tories are trying to do is line their own pockets, unless Labour councillors were doing the same.

And come on, TiG, fix this glitch, the uncertainty is killing me...”

“Ysedra MBT - mechanical biological treatment - there are various combinations of processes to suit different materials - all shredded/size reduced, bio-degradables are composted, and the other carbonaceous materials mashed up, incombustible rubble and soil separated, the combustible stream dried and composting reduces bio-activity, then processed into convenient pellets or cakes of refuse derived fuel RDF. The incombustible rubble and process wastes sent to landfill. The RDF then has to be sold off - as fuel - mainly fed into power stations with coal, or other energy from waste facilities, also possibility of gasifying - but that requires further processing.

As it is an im=ntermediate process - reduce volume and dry, reduce bio-activity - in many cases if RDF is not to standard, may have to be landfilled or to incinerator.

GlosCC - all this far too complex, and costs more than a straight energy from waste, also overall environmental footprint better for EFW than MBT.”

“I think many of us have suffered from these difficulties in the last day or so, Bonkim2003. That we soldier on when most 'normal' people give up probably proves everything they say about us ;-)

The entire purpose of the site visit appears to have been that the planning committee could see how big the plant will be, which seemed like a wasted trip, as whatever its size, it will be argued that that's how big it *needs* to be, and all the challenges about AONB and chimney height will be dismissed. I was irked that the trek to Harefield Beacon didn't happen, but for the reasons outlined above, it didn't really matter either.

Now the big question is whether the plan can be altered at the meeting next week. I don't see how it can, but I don't give up, not while the planners can't explain why the rejected MBT, which in the light of UBB's extensive experience in constructing such plants, I don't believe they can.

What disappoints me most is that despite being on the planning committee, our only Green councillor seems to have been asleep on the job when it came to pointing this fact out to the rest of the committee. She can't speak out about this publicly and remain on the committee, but she will have to once a decision is reached...”

“sorry guys for the multiple copies arising from non-responsive TIG server.”