Dr. Dick Van Steenis Caerphilly talk on danger from Incinerators

Dr. Dick Van Steenis has agreed to give a talk on nano-particle emissions from waste incinerators to members of the public and others…..venue Caerphilly Council Chamber, Tredomen, Ystrad Mynach, Wednesday 19th January, 5.0pm till 8.0pm……..everyone welcome to attend.


Dr. Dick van Steenis, a retired GP and well known campaigner on the dangers to human health from the emissions of EFW Waste Incinerators has agreed to give a presentation to members of the public and others on the serious hazards to human health posed by the emission of "nano-particles" which are freely emitted by Electric from Waste (EFW) Incinerators such as the type being proposed to be installed and used by Caerphilly County Borough Council in their partnership arrangement with Project Gwyrdd INCINERATOR for the disposal of residual waste.
The presentation followed by questions and answers has been arranged for Wednesday the 19th January 2011 in the Council Chamber at Tredomen from 5.0pm until 8.0pm.
NOTE
Statements by the Health Protection Agency to Michael Ryan, Environment Agency and in Hansard 30 November 2009 by the Dept. of Health all agree NO RESEARCH has been carried out around incinerators in particular comparing health data and PM2.5 & PM1 data upwind with downwind. The HPA have issued false unsubstantiated claims which are simply fairy stories concocted by incinerator company lobbyists Enviros & others not based on any measurements. The Environment Agency hence authorise incinerator emissions as high as 30ug/m3 namely 120 times that of 2 incinerators in Finland & 2 in Sweden. The EA wrote 2010 that the UK bag filters allow 90% of PM1s and 35% of PM2.5s through, hence the needless deaths & illnesses on a grand scale.

Mapping by electoral ward of NHS PCT & ONS data proves new & old UK incinerators kill & maim very large numbers. Measurements in Mexico City & Sweden prove this. Emissions in Sweden revealed the incinerator PM2.5s comprised 33% of total, well over double traffic namely 300 times higher
than claimed by a UK substandard technology application. The UK incinerators areillegal under the EC November 2008 directive. The HPA are telling lies and should be prosecuted.

Prosiect Gwyrdd 'GREEN'wash is out of date on motivation, waste data and policy,

Project Green should go green asp!! Project Green = Project incinerator

Fib dems /Plaid Prosiect Gwyrdd 'GREEN'wash is out of date on motivation, waste data and policy, it would fail tests for soundness, including (non)consistency with Cardiff's waste policy.

The biggest inconsistency is the claim to meet the residual waste level of 150kg /person/year.

..arguments about uncertainties, figures going up and down each year, are skewered by this number. Current population (830 000) times 150kg gives 125 000 t/yr (perhaps 140 000t/yr with some population growth) far below the 220 000 t/yr of P Gwyrdd.

No big Burner required!!

- the single big facility (incinerator) is likely to be old technology, cutting out the newer methods for extracting materials and value from residual waste.

- their out-of-date projections assumed continual growth in residual waste - it’s now reducing with a WAG target 40% lower (PG needs the high level to make incineration a 'viable proposition')

- they ignore the landfill needed for the ‘reference’ incinerator, for non-combustible materials and for thousands of tonnes of incinerator ash

- they assume all incinerator bottom ash to be re-used in building, yet much of it will be hazardous waste (the EU’s waste incineration regulations are beginning to bite)

- they excluded the cheapest, most flexible and environmentally preferred Mechanical+Biological treatments (MBT) stabilising biowastes for soils (WAG was planning to ban this but have now changed policy, over to using quality protocols as in England)

- they have pushed through the policy without public consultation, afraid of the anti-incineration backlash, so have no public consent to this hugely costly gamble.

It was not just Prosiect Gwyrdd, but also WAG that went off course, chasing incinerators. Now WAG’s defeat over banning MBT-output to soil or landfill and their dismissal of incinerator ash and dioxin issues leaves PG on an unsound basis.

PG really wantes to be technology-neutral and flexible, it should go for

* preference for flexible projects, less than 10 years (as Sterecycle’s autoclave)

* reduce the guideline tonnage from 220 000t to a realistic level (under 140 000t/yr)

* any incinerator bid to meet the efficiency standard and deal with its hazardous ashes

* high importance to carbon footprint, assessed on the international (IPCC) methods

The consultants’ report for Friends of the Earth “A changing climate for Energy from Waste?” 2006 http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/reports/changing_climate.pdf was important in showing the way to a non-incinerating strategy.

The study for Ireland (with a similar mix of industrial and rural areas to Wales)

Greenstar 2008,

“Meeting Ireland’s Waste Targets: The Role of MBT”,

shows that MBT is environmentally much preferable in switching from landfill into high recycling and waste treatment. WAG says it wants to do this but has been diverted into incinerators.

stop Wales being carpeted with incinerators

Last spring 4 of the South East Wales Local authorities (LAs) were grouping together to source a residual waste treatment plant, codename Prosiect Gwyrdd (Project Green Wash). MBT was mentioned but then the focus shifted to EfW

There was a fairly good chance of influencing the LAs until WAG announced their capital spending fund for partnership working on waste projects would only awarded to EfW plants, not MBT. This decision seems to have been taken after seeing the Hyder report they commissioned for the Regional Waste Plan consultations. This, in turn, seems to be based on the WRATE analysis they did of the options.

The WRATE analysis Hyder did was biased in favour of EfW, the WAG should reconsider their position and stop Wales being carpeted with incinerators.