Blog Archives

Incinerators 3: Weasel words from the Health Protection Agency & Norfolk exposure of flawed monitoring

 


weasel words cartoon

 Health Protection Agency: significant points highlighted:

The Health Protection Agency has reviewed research undertaken to examine the suggested links between emissions from municipal waste incinerators and effects on health. While it is not possible to rule out adverse health effects from modern, well regulated municipal waste incinerators with complete certainty, any potential damage to the health of those living close-by is likely to be very small, if detectable. This view is based on detailed assessments of the effects of air pollutants on health and on the fact that modern and well managed municipal waste incinerators make only a very small contribution to local concentrations of air pollutants. The Committee on Carcinogenicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment has reviewed recent data and has concluded that there is no need to change its previous advice, namely that any potential risk of cancer due to residency near to municipal waste incinerators is exceedingly low and probably not measurable by the most modern techniques. Since any possible health effects are likely to be very small, if detectable, studies of public health around modern, well managed municipal waste incinerators are not recommended.

Source: http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1251473372218

But if, as alleged, monitoring is seriously flawed, the HPA figures are worthless

Accurate base line monitoring is essential for establishing a reference point to measure future increases in air pollution. If particulate PM2.5 is found to be increased in the Urban Air this would be in breach of EU Directive 2008/50/EC and could lead to legal action forcing the (very expensive) closure of the incinerator. Directive 2008/50/EC  . . .

Base line monitoring equipment in West Norfolk is placed where it can be guaranteed not to detect an increase in future air pollution

To provide meaningful base line data the prevailing wind needs to be taken into account and air monitoring equipment located at varying distances downwind of the proposed incinerator, especially in the town of King’s Lynn, so compliance with Directive can be checked.

If monitoring equipment is not located with due care, it will fail to register increases in air pollution and could make it difficult to determine if air quality has deteriorated from pre-incinerator levels.

A freedom of information request has revealed on 11th March 2010 a representative of SKM Enviros held discussions with Council staff regarding base line monitoring.

incinerator monitoringThey currently have base line monitoring equipment in operation at the only place in West Norfolk where it can be guaranteed not to detect an increase in future air pollution.

Figure 1 is a recent photograph showing monitoring equipment operating at the intended location of the incinerator.

Figure 2 is a photograph of an operational incinerator to help illustrate why this location is inappropriate for recording base line air pollution.

incinerator monitoring 2The purpose of the tall incinerator chimney stack is to disperse the pollution away from the immediate site area. If an incinerator is constructed with an 8o meter tall stack the purpose of the stack is to disperse the pollution away from the immediate site area. Particulate Matter/emissions do not fall to earth like a stone as they leave the stack thus; it is evident whichever way the wind is blowing air quality at the base of the incinerator will always be free from any significant incinerator emissions whatever concentrations are emitted from the stack.

This point is illustrated by the X in a box at the bottom of figure 2 if this was the position of the County Councils’ emissions monitoring equipment it would be completely ineffective. If this location is used to monitor air quality before and after the incinerator is built any figures published will implying the incinerator is not contributing to air pollution. It will reinforce what the HPA believe to be true. Even if data collected at this location is only used as a contribution to a wider survey, it will bring the average reading down making the emissions appear cleaner than they really are.

East Anglian monitoring will not provide any meaningful data relating to the proposed incinerator.

incinerator monitoring  3

Figure 3 shows the 10 sites in East Anglia where fine particles PM2.5 are currently being monitored, they are not within the critical 16 mile of the proposed incinerator where the main deposition of fallout can be expected, they also will not provide any meaningful data relating to the incinerator.

Source: www.farmerscampaign.org/monitoring.html

 

 

Javelin Park 2: Gloucestershire County Council’s PFI incinerator deal with Urbaser Balfour Beatty: case officer removed & consultants brought in

 

PCU has recorded Gloucestershire County Council’s desire to build a £500 million Urbaser Balfour Beatty Energy from Waste incinerator at Javelin Park in Haresfield. It is reported that 103 incinerator sites were licensed in 2010, that in 2011 DEFRA had 20 more applications from large power companies and that a large number of government advisers are involved in the expensive and remunerative incinerator PFI deals.

Highlighting growing concerns that there will be too many incinerators in the UK by 2015 and that they will severely hamper recycling, Cheltenham MP Martin Horwood tabled Early Day Motion 383, . . . to read on click here.

Opposition to this plan by residents, opposition groups and local authorities has been well documented in the Stroud News & Journal by journalist Chris Warne.

Update: the council removes the case officer from the Javelin Park application and brings in a team of consultants – at taxpayers’ expense

GCG says that this – done without informing a lead member of its planning committee – is perfectly normal practice, but the SNJ’s editorial comment is: “There is a school of management that keeps on asking the same question until the right answer appears”.

Geoff Wheeler, the leader of Stroud District Council, has now instructed officers to write to Eric Pickles at the Department for Communities and Local Government, asking him to ‘call in’ the plans as he did with the Kings Lynn incinerator application in August.

GCG’s Lib-Dems, supported by the Labour Group, have separately called in the bid for extra scrutiny but the County Council hopes to determine the application in the New Year.

SouthWest Business reported last Friday that planning experts at Stroud District Council have warned that the £500million scheme to build a waste-to-energy plant at Javelin Park, supported by Gloucestershire County Council and incinerator firm Urbaser Balfour Beatty, could be thrown out by a Government inspector because of the impact it could have on the environment.

Irregularities in procedure

Stroud’s Councillor Marjoram points out irregularities in procedure: the council selected a contractor for the construction before planning permission had been granted, signing a contract with a penalty clause which will charge them £15 million if they renege on the agreement or don’t get planning permission.

Apply the precautionary principle

Ian Richens, spokesman for the campaigning group GlosVAIN, grimly reminds all that in the 1970s asbestos was similarly presented as posing no danger to health and adds:

“Let us not make the same mistake again”.#

 

NOTE:

United Kingdom Without Incineration Network

UKWIN has nearly 100 groups campaigning for sustainable waste management and against waste incineration. They say that the incineration of household waste:

  • depresses recycling and wastes resources,
  • releases greenhouse gases, and is
  • often forced through against strong public opposition.
  • create toxic emissions and hazardous ash, and therefore pose significant health risks.

Electoral reaction: in Kings Lynn, Labour’s Alex Kempe won a county council seat from the Conservatives.  Their majority of 272 at the last election was transformed into a 400 majority for Labour.  Ms Kemp said that the issue of the proposed incinerator had a major bearing on the outcome. The County Council’s decision to award a contract for the construction of an incinerator has been ‘called in’ – there will be a full public inquiry in January 2013.