Demands to be made for written guarantee that 'toxic' ash will never go to Wingmoor Farm
DEMANDS are being made for a written guarantee that none of the 'toxic' ash from the county's planned incinerator will end up in Bishop's Cleeve.
Councillor Ceri Jones (LD, Cleeve) wants a concrete pledge from Gloucestershire County Council that the ash won't be taken to the controversial Wingmoor Farm waste management site.
It is thought a contract to take the waste to a facility in Peterborough is in the pipeline, but Mr Jones wants to know how long the contract is for.
Mr Jones said: "From the outset I have been against the incinerator because I believe there are better economic and environmental ways of doing things.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Friday, May 31 2013
"The council talks about zero waste to landfill from the incinerator, but I am afraid these incinerators do create ash and it will be landfill. That is environmentally wrong.
"I don't think it should be landfilled anyway because there are now technologies available to do something with it.
"I am against any of this filthy toxic fly ash being brought in to Bishop's Cleeve.
"They have said it will go to Peterborough and I have asked how long the contract is because I am fearful that it could be, say, for a year, and then this ash will end up in Bishop's Cleeve."
Speaking at a meeting of the full county council, Mr Jones asked for clarification of what would happen to the 'toxic fly ash'.
He asked: "Can you repeat your previous guarantee that at no time will any of this toxic ash come to Wingmoor Farm in Bishop's Cleeve?"
Councillor Ray Theodoulou, cabinet member for finance and change, replied: "That is the intent."
The council has disputed the ash being labelled as toxic. It says the residues that need to be disposed of "are hazardous due to their alkalinity and are not toxic".
The council's contract with Urbaser Balfour Beatty's (UBB) allows the firm behind the incinerator to "explore alternatives to the disposal and treatment" of the residues.
Councillor Stan Waddington, cabinet champion for waste, said: "This is political scaremongering. We've made it clear to Councillor Jones on many occasions, the Air Pollution Control (APC) residues from Javelin Park will be going to Peterborough.
"UBB are working to find ways to recycle APC, avoiding the need for landfill altogether."
4 Comments
by geordiegirli
Tuesday, February 19 2013, 2:19PM
“Greenpeace Toxics campaigner Mark Strutt said,
"It is dangerous and irresponsible to dispose of hazardous ash like this leaving a toxic heritage for future generations. There are no safe levels for many of these chemicals whether they are released as chimney gases or end up ash. Byker and the other 12 incinerators should be shut for good and the Government should cancel its plans to build any more."
The one in Byker was shut not in the main due to the ash problem but because EU decreed there were better filters that had to be replaced...- why on earth would Glooucestershire want an incinerator.”
by QuedgeleyGuy
Monday, February 18 2013, 11:11AM
“@Bonkim2003
Are you denying that Waddington said APC Residues are going to Peterborough?
As for politics; Are you denying that politics are not present in every aspect of our lives and that I'm wrong to query what I consider to be the abuses of the system by the very people who should be totally open and honest about what they do?”
by Bonkim2003
Monday, February 18 2013, 10:05AM
“QuedgeleyGuy - why are you so hung up on this - it is not in a council's powers to dictate to commercial operators where they get their materials from or sent to - so silly assumption in your statement which is purely political.
It is for the Env Agency to monitor what goes in landfill and stop harmful materials if any.
To point out to the fallacy of import/export - what makes you think Peterborough would welcome what glos does not want - we live in the United Kingdom - and governed by commercial/environmental legislation covering the whole country - what is different from furnace ash prodeced in say New Castle compared with that in Stroud? Get real - commercial firms will deal with what they consider appropriate/profitable, considering transport and other costs.
You sound rabidly political to make sense.”
by Bonkim2003
Monday, February 18 2013, 9:08AM
“ash from waste to energy facilities have commercial uses - and in any case cannot be sent out unless treated suitably if that becomes necessary.
Generally, such ash is inert, but the env agency one assumes will monitor all materials sent out from such facilities. Written guarantees mean nothing - what will matters is setting up a monitoring system and appropriate quality controls.”