Councillors off to Ireland on incinerator fact-finding trip

“Future2010 - I don't need to check with Eunomia - and AD is an establish process for generating biogas (high Methane content) mainly from food wastes.

Any and all waste and process contractors will provide a variety of processes for dealing with different types of wastes or in combination - so nothing new that UBB or Veolia or Biffa would provide the process or mix of processes for collecting, sorting, and treating different waste streams or in combination.

The economics and environmental footprint of individual collection, and treatment processes or their combination depend upon location, quantities, and preferences of the buyer and there is no one answer - a bit like buying your car or house - personal biases, ignorance, competence of those carrying out the technical, and economic selection processes all come to play, as do locational factors, design of collection rounds, etc. As you say - look at the whole picture, and don't be biased about combustion processes and their need to comply with licensing and regulatory authorities.

Regards Eunomia many councils appoint such consultants for political expediency, such reports are often ambivalent and you need to be an expert to read and analyse their findings and allocate risk factors to various analysis and conclusions arrived at - that is another debate.”

“Incineration IS the waste technology with the highest CO2 emissions (check out the Eunomia report).

Urbaser Balfour Beatty may be planning to build a huge incinerator in Gloucestershire, but they are building environmentally friendly MBT and AD facilities for another county as their waste solution!

What is left over after MBT and AD processing, does not have to go to RDF, there are other alternatives.

It is a fact that this incinerator would be less efficient than a coal fired power station, and that incineration will produce toxic fly ash that is landfilled and pump dioxins into the atmosphere (while MBT and AD do not).

Everyone knows that AD technology produces methane, however, it is produced in a closed vessel, injected into the grid and used in the same way as natural gas, it is not pumped into the atmosphere.

It is important to look at the whole picture.

Sorry I don't have more time to respond.”

“I couldn't comment on the level of that group's technical ability, but attempts to undermine their credibility could indicate that someone somewhere is very worried about what they are saying because it is accurate.”

“The Avonmouth MBT plant much liked by Glosvain is an intermediate process - AD, and/or composting and drying - which still results in refuse derived fuel - either to be burnt in power stations/energy from waste plants or if substandard to be landfilled. They are working on a gasification process for the RDF which is supposed to achieve greater efficiency compared with straight combustion - but adds additional complexity/cost - this is not due to come on stream for many years, will not be able to deal with all the RDF produced - a theoretical concept that the resultant gas can be cleaned up and burnt in engines providing greater overall efficiency that steam turbines.

Glosvain consist of amateurs with little technical ability - a gut-feel anti- EFW theology.”

“Chas_Townley - may not be UBB but same boiler maker.”

“Future2010 - basic chemistry - you get the same carbon dioxide balance whichever way you deal with such material. In fact the other methods - MBT, composting, etc, involve more process and transport stages increasing fossil fuel use and overall carbon footprint. Also in other treatment methods there is chance of products other than carbon dioxide being generated - methane, ammonia, etc, which are much more harmful environmentally.”

“Chas_Townley - good analysis - where GCC and the satellite councils have failed is in hoisting a muddled mix high cost, low environmentally efficient, complex multi-bin collection and recycling system in advance of designing an integrated waste management system for the county. Overall the mix is sub-optimum and taxpayers will be lumbered with high costs at a time when so many important services are being sacrificed or being charged.”

“It should not be forgotten that:

DEFRA withdrew PFI funding for the Javelin Park proposed incinerator because they say that there is already sufficient capacity for dealing with our waste in the area. (According to current waste figures there will not be "sufficient" capacity, there will be "over" capacity if this monstrosity ever gets built).

The height of the proposed incinerator (building 48.5m high and stack 70m high) vastly exceeds the height restriction of 15.7m. imposed by the Secretary of State on that area.”

“Excuse the pun but I think that GlosVAIN's efforts to stop the Incinerator at Javalin Park may be in vain.

After a decision on Worcestershire County Council's incinerator in August, I'd judge the County's likelihood of success as somewhere in the region of 99 to 100%. The Secretary of State, Eric Pickles MP, having considered the Inspector's report gave consent. His decision letter and the inspectors report run to 150 pages and is probably only of real interest to planning geeks but covers a number of issues which are perhaps relevant to Javelin Park.

I have special reasons for keeping an eye on what has happened in Worcestershire. Linda, My late wife was a member of Worcestershire County Council from 1997 to 2001 and shortly before we moved back to Stroud Linda's last duty (and joy as she drafted the refusal reasons) was to sit on the County Planning Committee which chucked out an application for an incinerator in Kidderminster. After loosing the inquiry (all at the cost of the County Council) the operator searched around for another site and eventually submitted an application at Hartlebury on a former RAF base sited in the Green Belt.

This new application had a significant group of opponents not least Conservative Peter Luff MP – an extremely effective constituency MP - who campaigned against it despite the County Council being Conservative run. It is to his credit that he got it called in by the Secretary of State, given Government policy to avoid most call in applications this was no mean feat. (Perhaps there are some learning points theree for Neil Carmicheal, who appears to be getting a sore bottom from sitting on the fence on everything except his beloved Antarctic Bill)

As to need the Secretary of State considers "there is a compelling and urgent need for the facility". Clearly different circumstances could apply in Gloucestershire but this does indicate that arguments against need are going to face an uphill struggle.

Despite accepting there would be harm to the Green Belt it concludes that "very special circumstances" outweigh the harm. Javalin Park is not in the Green Belt but some have argued that it could impact the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Climate Change impact is considered to be beneficial in comparison with carrying on with landfill. Similar positive support is given to the facility being a sustainable waste management project particularly as it helps to implement the national waste strategy.

The Inquiry heard evidence about the health concerns of local people but Mr Pickles concluded that there is "no evidence to suggest that perceptions of health risk are objectively justified". In part this relies on new guidance which suggests these are matters for the Enviroment Agency not the planning authority.

Like Worcestershire, Gloucestershire County Council has spent a considerable time selecting the site they consider the best in the County, making sure it is well located to urban centres, decent transport links and the like. Alongside this they have constructed an "emerging" waste local plan which supports the development of sites for waste management.

But Gloucestershire has gone further than that back in the days of the Lib/Lab pact in 2003 they went to market asking for waste disposal schemes which excluded the option of waste from energy. Their timing was lousy and the bids came in just after the Tories took control, who perhaps with good reason, quietly dumped the bids in the bin as too expensive. And the last bid round didn't result in any other than incineration/ energy from waste being shortlisted.

And perhaps for those who support composting, who often give the much publicised New Earth Solutions plant at Avonmouth as an example, they might want to go and talk to locals in Sharpness about their less publicised experiences of the company and explain why an apparently benign process continues to require weekly monitoring by the Environment Agency”

“Zerowaste your coments could be libelous as the incinerator they are going to see is not operated by UBB”