Plan for Ernesettle waste incinerator dropped
ANTI-incinerator campaigners were celebrating last night after a
waste firm dropped plans to burn domestic rubbish in Ernesettle.
-
MVV
Umwelt, which has faced intense pressure from local residents, said it
would concentrate its efforts on a proposal for an Energy from Waste
(EfW) plant at Devonport Dockyard's North Yard.
The decision leaves just two sites in the running to handle domestic waste for Plymouth, Torbay and South Devon.
The
planned £100million incinerator is being commissioned for the South
West Devon Waste Partnership, which includes Plymouth City Council.
A
second waste firm, Viridor, has already submitted a planning
application for an incinerator at New England Quarry, south of Lee Mill.
Viridor has said that it might go ahead, regardless of the outcome of the bidding.
The preferred bidder will be announced early in 2011.
Paul
Carey, managing director of MVV Environment, MVV Umwelt's UK
subsidiary, said: "North Yard offers many environmental and economic
advantages over Ernesettle."
He said they had agreement in principle to provide steam and electricity to the Naval Base.
MVV is refining its proposal for the North Yard site, which is in the Weston Mill area bordering Blackies Wood.
There was also the potential to offer any surplus heat to a wider district heating network.
Geraldine
Lane, chair of the anti-incinerator group Stifle, said: "This is really
good news for the greenfield site at Ernesettle, but in terms of those
of us who don't want an incinerator at all it remains a problem.
"I
know the community would really like to have the land returned as a
sports facility, or perhaps used as a nature walk or a park."
Ernesettle could still be used for handling waste according to Plymouth City Council's planning framework.
Mrs
Lane said: "I don't see a problem with having an area recycling
facility there, because Plymouth is desperately short of recycling."
Gary Streeter, Conservative MP for South West Devon, said the decision was not unexpected.
"North
Yard has a lot going for it, not least its proximity to commercial
buildings and ease of access from the Parkway through Camel's Head.
"I am hoping we can persuade the waste partnership that Lee Mill isn't suitable."
Campaigner Geoff Hillier said he was opposed to incineration in principle.
All waste should be sorted for recycling and composting, he said, with the small residue going to landfill.
Germany recycled 70 per cent of its waste, compared with Plymouth's 30 per cent, he said.
Joe
Ellison, Saltash Independent councillor, said: "We're absolutely
delighted that Ernesettle is off the agenda. It would have affected
Saltash as much as Ernesettle. This is a real cause for celebration.
"We'll keep a close eye and monitor whatever proposals there are for this site in future."
When
told the news, Anita Brandon, who lives in Ernesettle Close,
overlooking the site, said: "That's marvellous. Being on top of the
hill, we'd have got it. Some days even now we get a stench from down
there."
Stephen Curtis, another neighbour, said Ernesettle Lane,
leading to the site, was unsuitable for the extra traffic that an
incinerator would have generated.
Since Chelson Meadow landfill site closed in 2008, Plymouth's waste has been taken to Lean Quarry near Liskeard.
Faced with escalating landfill taxes and fines, the city is under pressure to find a solution to its waste problem.
19 Comments
View all
by Another_Ian, Devonport
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 12:02PM
“"Also the reason for this plant to be built in North Yard is, I believe, to burn the low level nuclear waste that will be generated when submarine scrapping begins, there will be plenty of it."
Clearly the person who wrote this has no conception of the rigours of nuclear waste management. But that isn't my main point - does anyone out there seriously believe that waste disposal for a population of >500,000 is going to be achieved without some form of large scale engineering because it you do, you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Look at all these windfarms cluttering up the landscape - how much energy do they actually produce - a tiny fraction of the amount we need. The rest is produced in large power plants. It will be the same with waste digesters and the like they will only chip away at the edges of the waste problem they won't solve it. (unless they are also even larger than the proposed incinerator) and how long will it take to raise recycling levels to German levels - years - meantime we disappear under a mountain of waste.
The proposed solution in the Dockyard will be an efficient long term solution using tried and tested technology and I would be confident that the emissions control will be more onerous than any limits applied to vehicles.
I hope by the way that none of the 'greens' who are objecting to this plant 'on principle' have mobile phones because we know how unsightly those masts are and how bad for us the radiation they emit is.
Like the man said - wake up and smell the coffee! We live in a modern world and if you want the benefits of technology, (cheap travel, plentiful food, instant communications etc.) plants like the one proposed and other large scale engineering projects are an inevitable trade off.”
by concerned, plymouth
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 10:56AM
“What is so wrong with nimby? taking pride in you live and wanting to protect your surroundings?
I believe the action group for the st Budeaux group is iiw.org.uk and they have stated that it's not just the locality that affected but anyone downwind 'That¿s most lightly you too' and it¿s more than just the dioxins that we need to be worried about with this cheap and dirty solution!”
by Charles A, Plymouth
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 7:51AM
“Ernesettle already has a stench most mornings from the Tamar. The reality is that emissions controls totally restirct the release of odours / noxious gases. Vehicle emissions may be an issue, but they are not an added burden, since they already exist and someone, somewhere will have to suffer them.
As for anaerobic digesters, that technology is relatively new and more suited to small localised facilities than anything of the scale being discussed here.
I am sure that any proposal, even a small anaerobic digester would generate the interest and protectionist response of organisations like STIFLE.”
by Fatjack, Plymouth - Dangerously close to proposed site
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 3:34AM
“Whoarethose People - If you feel that confident you should go back to Deptford/Bermondsey because if you don't originate from there you should go an live there.
Mark Stanley - can we have your address so that we can suggest that they build the incinerator next to your house!!! as you are so keen.
We should all be prepared to have this monstrosity build on our back yard as we have already been selected as the UK's nuclear dumping ground for redundant Subs, so why shouldn't we be also selected to receive all the S**t from the rest of Devon. Dave Devonport - agree how do you get in touch with an MP - too busy playing the violin with there expenses. There is a massive sign on the A38 saying "no incinerator" at Lee Miil Area - I suppose the plan will get dropped from that proposal as well, given all the "posh" folks that live out there, and the people of St Budeaux, Devonport,Keyham etc will just be walked all over again.”
by susan clark, st budeaux
Tuesday, March 16 2010, 12:02AM
“wake wake up the whole of plymouth surrounding areas .this should not be built anywhere near anyones homes.Everyone should fight against it for the sakes of the next generation.we have breathed in enough fumes toxics over the years from the dockyard.Tell the councils to do more recycling!why should we have everyone elses rubbish?”