4:20pm Friday 8th August 2008
AN environmental group has spoken out against the council’s plans for an incinerator as part of its waste strategy.
The council is facing the challenge of significantly reducing rubbish to avoid fines of £150 for every tonne above the Government’s target.
Its preferred option of solving the town’s waste woes is by creating energy from waste.
This process burns rubbish under factory-controlled conditions to reduce its volume and hazardous properties and generate electricty from the heat.
Warrington Friends of the Earth says it is aware of just how crucial it is to reduce the quantity of rubbish but belives that an incinerator is not the most effective method.
A spokesman for the group said: “Incineration is an outdated, expensive and polluting technology. The inefficiency of energy production by incinerators and the fact that they divert waste from recycling, means that they are much worse for climate change than other technologies.”
Issues such as the expense of the facility and the long-term financial commitment through council tax were also highlighted as disadvantages.
The group believes that the council’s focus should be on maximising recycling, with a separate collection of food waste for treatment by composting or anaerobic digestion being introduced.
The spokesman added: “Separate food waste collections offer the biggest potential for improving recycling rates, meeting targets for reducing how much we landfill and reducing the pressure for new incinerators.”
The green group would like to see waste that can’t be recycled (from black bins) being processed by mechanical biological treatment that produces refuse derived fuel, with a small amount being sent to landfill.
The spokesman added: “Research has found this to be a much better treatment in terms of climate change.”
Warrington Friends of the Earth are encouraging residents to let the council know their views on an incinerator in the town by downloading the consultation questionnaire from www.warrington.gov.uk, calling 443322 or e-mailing wastewatchers@warring ton.gov.uk.
A spokesman for Warrington Borough Council said: “The solution that Friends of the Earth have suggested is one that we modelled in our initial consultation process.
“It was felt that it did not perform as well as other models we tested or with the model we are proposing.
It must also be recognised that there has been public and stakeholder involvement in the creation of the draft waste strategy, currently out for consultation.
“The recommendations contained within the draft strategy reflect the views of those Warrington householders and stakeholders, and not purely those of the council.
“’We’ll be happy to discuss the issues with Warrington Friends of the Earth when we meet. “
Add your comment
Register for a FREE This Is Cheshire account and you can have your say on today's news and sport by adding comments on articles we publish. The best comments may even get published in the paper.
Please register now or sign in below to continue.
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Find a job in Cheshire
Search Now »
Find that special someone
Search Now »
Search properties in Cheshire
Search Now »
Find vehicles for sale in Cheshire
Search Now »
Michael Ryan, Shrewsbury says...
12:46pm Sat 16 Aug 08
Plasma gasification is the cheapest & safest method of waste disposal & that's why the City of Ottawa have recently awarded Plasco a contract to use that method to safely dispose of their municipal waste at a "gate fee" cost pf about thirty pounds per tonne, i.e. 60 Canadian Dollars.
Here in UK, gate fees for incineration are over sixty pounds per tonne and the health damage costs are about the same again.
There must be at least one decision maker who realises that saving one hundred pounds per tonne of waste disposed of must be a "good idea" and I'd have expected FoE and others to be pushing this process which leaves no toxic ash, just vitrified gravel that's inert and suitable for use in road constriction as sub-base.
Incinerator companies are always happy to meet FoE as FoE have an appalling track record on their anti-incinerator campaigns.
Maybe someone can remind me of how many they've won? I'm sure that the figure is zero. "Couldn;t do any worse" would be the comment I'd write on their performance appraisal.
More information on incinerators & also the links to Dorking Advertiser and Surrey Mirror articles of Health Protection Agency's failure to examine any health or mortality data around any incinerator at www.ukhr.org
If FoE were bothered about health effects, they'd have made sure that the above Surrey articles were in National Press within a day or so. Maybe they were on their hols at that time, but they should be back now
Kind regards,
Michael Ryan,
Shrewsbury