Cardiff, Caerphilly, Newport,
Monmouthshire, Vof G Councils want a big burner which Ties them into a very expensive PFI for 25 YEARS to burn waste rather than improve recycling rates. The Prosiect Gwyrdd councils are striving towards a feeble 65% recycling by 2025 with at least a further 5% being ASH from the incinerator. Many other councils have already exceeded 70% recyling rates.
“Prosiect Gwyrdd” = Scam Green = WAG Welsh Waste Policy = incinerators
Will it save money building a massive incinerator?
No, it may end up costing us a fortune and tied in to a contract councils can’t get out of.
Viridor cannot build their costly giant incinerator unless they get a long-term (25 yr) contract from Cardiff and the other Councils, who would then not try to meet their recycling and residual waste targets. This has already happened to some English Councils, who find their predecessors signed contracts for more waste than is now being produced, so send their recycling collections too or pay a penalty. Having an incinerator would actually prevent increasing recycling and composting rates at a later date.
FACTS
giant incinerator 350 000t/yr, over-sized even for the 5 Scam Gwyrdd councils
domestic waste is decreasing with more recycling,
residual waste to reduce to 130 000 tons/yr for the5-authority region
other waste facilities in other Council areas could and should come much sooner
Viridor said half their waste for burning would be industrial/commercial – but it’s not needed as their recycling is increasing fast (avoiding the high incineration costs).
Can we use the heat from the Viridor incinerator?
There can only be a WASTE of heat! There are no realistic uses for the immense 70 MW heat, year-round with no back-up supply in the event of breakdown and maintenance down-time. No evidence that Viridor has any real plans to lay costly pipes needed to actually supply any of the heat at all. Against WAG policy
Is the Viridor incinerator efficient?
It is so Very inefficient – it is called waste ‘disposal’ under European standard
Whoops and what about the DANGEROUS EMISSIONS?
What do we do with the 17,500 tonnes of hazardous toxic ash? They expect to send it to England at great cost to dumps with huge local opposition.
The production of poisonous dioxins
An incinerator of this sort has toxic emissions, particularly ultrafine particles (nanoparticles)
How many lorries will be driving through Cardiff every Day to deliver this rubbish to Viridor in Splott?
Could be up to
260 BIG DIRTY RUBBISH LORRIES
every day
Adding to congestion
And what is the carbon footprint of all this? Send the answer...
Time for AMs to prove how green they are - speak out against Scam Gwyrdd - project green and incineration! Viridor's appeal is likely to go to the Welsh Assembly, so lobby your AM Council planning committee have thrown out the application for Viridor but the Lib Dems/Plaid Cymru still promoting Scam Gwyrdd = project green and building an INCINERATOR
No surprise then Viridor has decided to appeal about the incinerator. Their press release makes a clear link between the Cardiff incinerator and Prosiect Grywdd - which is the agreement amongst some south east wales local authorities to combine their waste problem. Viridor wants to drive it all through Cardiff in lots of lovely dirty lorries... probably through Bute park!!
Scotland aims for 70% real cycling, 25% cap on incineration;
Wales aims for 63% real recycling, 37% cap on incineration. Assembly politicians should be ashamed of what WAG is foisting on Wales in the guise of ‘ambitious recycling’. Worrying promotion of incineration WAG Approval of the business case and subsidy for Prosiect Gwyrdd, 27 Jan. 2009: New funding boost for next generation energy-from-waste plant in south Wales The Minister depicted Prosiect Gwyrdd as "producing much needed energy" that would "use waste in the best possible way", despite the consortium claiming their Business case for procuring a ‘solution’ for residual waste is technology-neutral (www.prosiectgwyrdd.gov.uk)
Viridor appeals energy from waste planning decision
19 October, 2009
Viridor has announced it is to appeal the decision taken by Cardiff Council's planning committee to refuse planning permission for an Energy from Waste Combined Heat and Power facility at Trident Park in Cardiff Bay.
The move comes after the city's planning committee went against the advice of its own officers in July and refused permission to build the facility, citing the fact waste could be brought in from other parts of south Wales as the reason....
P Gwyrdd and the nominated "available" site at Queensway Meadows near Llanwern. Newport
The the "study" that chose that site below. The waste heat from a CHP incinerator would be enough for much of Newport (if this was viable, why not take the waste heat from the existing power stations). If there is no practical scheme or funding for laying extensive heat pipes, then the whole idea of a single large incinerator (at Newport) should be ruled out.
UKWIN used the Poyry study to argue this in general
Please come to our Emergency Local Residents Meeting to oppose the proposed Biofuel Station coming to Newport - and please tell all your friends, families, nieghbours and workmates to come along too - this is so important.
EMERGENCY LOCAL ANGRY RESIDENTS MEETING
7pm MONDAY 7th September 2009
TIVOLI SUITE (upstairs)
PILL MILLENIUM CENTRE, PILL, NEWPORT.
COME ALONG AND BRING EVERYONE YOU KNOW TO SEE WHY THE PROPOSED BIOFUEL POWER STATION WILL BE SO HARMFUL TO THE PEOPLE OF NEWPORT AND IN PARTICULAR THE RESIDENTS OF PILL.
(which you then need to add your name and address to).
Dear Councillor
What's Wrong with the Newport Power Station?
A company called Vogen is planning to build a new electricity power station at the Alexandra Dock, Newport, South Wales. Newport City Council is now deciding whether to give planning permission.
The power station will burn 40,000 tonnes of biofuel (vegetable oil) a year, including virgin vegetable oil and palm oil. The power station will lead to increased local air pollution, global climate change, rainforest destruction, extinction of animals in the rainforest, world food shortages and human rights abuses.
If this power station is built:
· Local air quality will get worse –Vegetable oil burning emits nitrogen oxides and small particulates linked to respiratory illnesses and heart problems.
· It will contribute to climate change. Biofuel production releases more greenhouse gases through land conversion and chemical fertiliser use than the fossil fuels they replace.
· It will make world food prices higher as vegetable oil will be used for electricity instead of food. The power station in Newport will burn over 100,000 litres of vegetable oil (most likely palm oil) a day, or over 40,000 tonnes of vegetable oil a year. If the vegetable oil were produced in the UK (eg from oil seed rape) it would need 10,000 hectares of farmland to grow the crops. This farmland could feed about 35,000 British people on a typical meat/veg diet. · People in other areas of the world, like South-east Asia and South America could be displaced from their homes to allow the necessary vegetable oil plants to be grown.
· It will NOT provide local residents with cheaper electricity.
So far there are no biofuel power stations in the UK although planning permission has been granted to build one in East London. In Germany, people living near their biofuel power stations suffer noise and smell, and at least one power station there has been refused planning permission.
Also on Wednesday 2nd September Ealing Borough Council's Planning Committee voted on whether to approve Blue NG's Biofuel Power station and all the councillors unanimously voted against it. The main reasons they were against it were to do with air pollution (Southall's air pollution already violates EU regs) and the power station exacerbating traffic in an already congested area. However they also mentioned food prices, the controversy of using biofuels, climate change, land displacement and human rights abuses and the fear that the oil stored on site could catch fire and explode. Blue NG already have planning permission to build the UK’s first agrofuel power station is Beckton, Newham, East London and this would have been their second. The Greater London Authority still have the power to overturn this decision although they do not usually overturn councillors’ decisions. For more information on biofuels see facts on biofuels and biofuels for electricity. Also see: http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/docs/lca_assessments.pdf http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk http://features.csmonitor.com/economyrebuild/2009/08/24/palm-oil-paradox/ http://sites.google.com/site/foodnotfuelorg/ It would be a great shame if Newport ended up with one of these stations - this is untested and the benefits are unproven - there should at least be a delay in planning approval and construction - otherwise we may deeply regret this in the future. Also why should the people of Newport, and, in particular the residents of Pill, be treated like laboratory guinea pigs based of unproven benefits?
The vote in the Scottish Parliament, carried because the Tories voted with the Greens and SNP. Just one Lib-Dem supported, 6 Labour absentees.
If burning up to a quarter of Scotland's municipal waste is "a failure of the imagination" how much bigger a failure is the proposed Welsh strategy with burning up to 37% proposed ! It appears that the governing SNP had a change in mind when confronted with 25% in their Minister's plan.
New FOE report
.......and Professor Dr Paul Connett Ph.D on zero waste here
..............................Right now the landfill surcharge is driving the building of massive incinerators
UK is moving from worst solution to the next worse solution i.e. moving from the bottom of the waste hierarchy up.
What we need are financial incentives to encourage communities to move to the top of the waste hierarchy –i.e. towards sustainability. Perhaps........
INCINERATION 20 pounds/ton surcharge
40 pounds/ton surcharge on ash
LANDFILLING 40 pounds/ton surcharge
The Governent is pushing councils in one direction - incineration
Charles Clover in The Sunday Times derided the government for pushing councils towards incineration as a solution for waste disposal. Previously incineration plants had been opposed because of fears of toxic emissions, an issue now largely dealt with by better burners. Clover said incineration should be opposed: "It starves recycling industries of raw materials and prevents a cheaper, greener business model from succeeding."
UK Health research here Effect on health unknown here Welsh councils' incinerator trend Environment minister Carwyn Jones has said the development of incinerators in Wales is ineitable.24-3-07 AN INCINERATOR close to Swansea's prestigious SA1 development is being investigated for allegedly pumping out too many harmful fumes...Residents...have been told that potentially-cancer-causing dioxin emissions were found to have been three times the limit when tested in December last year. Waste Burning Could Be Lethal (from Oxford Mail) Incinerators - are WMD's? Health Impacts of Incinerators here UK without incineration network here
A report from Friends of the Earth reveals the huge extent of the pollution and financial losses caused by our love of landfill and incinerationmore...
Wales Climate Camp
The Minister depicted Prosiect Gwyrdd as "producing much needed energy" that would "use waste in the best possible way", despite the consortium claiming their Business case for procuring a ‘solution’ for residual waste is technology-neutral
WAG Approval of the business case and subsidy for Prosiect Gwyrdd, 27 Jan. 2009:
New funding boost for next generation energy-from-waste plant in south Wales
Why are incinerator residues not counted in the recycling/composting indicator?hereClassification of Incinerator Bottom Ash (updated 29 Nov. 2008)
Facebook Groups
No Incinerator in Cardiff Bay here
- Councils Scam Gwyrdd
Scottish Parliament: National Waste Strategy
Scottish Parliament vote against large-scale incinerators -The vote in the Scottish Parliament, carried because the Tories voted with the Greens and SNP. Just one Lib-Dem supported, 6 Labour absentees.
If burning up to a quarter of Scotland's municipal waste is "a failure of the imagination" how much bigger a failure is the proposed Welsh strategy with burning up to 37% proposed !
It appears that the governing SNP had a change in mind when confronted with 25% in their Minister's plan.
*S3M-4348.1 Scottish Parliament: National Waste Strategy (11 Jun 2009)
11 Jun 2009 ... Greens win Holyrood Vote against "Landfill in the Sky". Parliament today endorsed Green opposition to plans for a new generation of ... there should be no necessity for any large-scale waste-to-energy plants to be built ...
Newport’s cabinet gave the go ahead to allow an Assembly-owned site on Tatton Road to be considered for the project. The site, in the industrial area of Queensway Meadows, is likely to be the only publicly owned site earmarked for the plant.
