The proposed site of the incinerator at Saddlebow, near King's Lynn. Picture: Ian Burt.
Should Secretary of State decide King’s Lynn incinerator plan, asks new report
Chris Bishop
Saturday, July 16, 2011
1:21 PM
A new report to councillors in West Norfolk says the decision over the controversial incinerator plan should be made by the Secretary of State, not the county council, as the war of words continues.
The increasingly bitter political debate has sparked a legal challenge and calls for an external inquiry into the way decisions were arrived at by Norfolk County Council’s ruling Tory group.
Now a report to West Norfolk councillors is calling for the decision over the incinerator to be taken out of the hands of the county council.
“There are concerns over the ability of the county council to deal objectively with this application,” the report to West Norfolk’s development control board states.
“Norfolk County Council is the PFI-partner to Cory Wheelabrator, which has lodged the application. If the application is not passed, Norfolk County Council will be liable to pay a £20.3m penalty to Cory Wheelabrator.
Burning Issue - the arguments in favour
The supporting statement for the incinerator planning application is included in full in West Norfolk council’s report.
It explains that Norfolk currently relies heavily on landfill, with 416,000 tonnes of waste buried in 2008/09, adding: “This situation is no longer economically or environmentally sustainable.”
Councils have targets for reducing landfill, and taxes levied on this means of waste disposal are increasing.
The application argues alternatives are needed. It says energy from waste techonolgy [incineration] offers a means of diverting waste from landfill and treating it, without compromosing Norfolk’s high levels of recycling.
The planning document says the incinerator would produce energy and offer “good value for money for the people of Norfolk”.
It states the incinerator would have a throughput of approximately 268,000 tonnes of waste a year, which will generate enough electricity to power the equivalent of 36,000 homes.
It adds: “The Proposal will accept residual Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) from Norfolk and Commercial and Industrial (C&I) waste arising from local businesses, some of which will come from neighbouring authority areas, given King’s Lynn’s location close to the county boundary.
“An Incinerator Bottom Ash (IBA) Recycling Area will recover around 5,000 tonnes of metals per year from the bottom ash produced by the EfW process and will enable the remaining bottom ash (around 55,000 tonnes per year) to be recycled for use in the construction industry.
“Both aspects promote sustainability by reducing the need for virgin raw materials and help boost recycling levels in Norfolk.”
The statement says planning permission to build the incinerator will need to be obtained from Norfolk County Council, while the Environment Agency will be responsible for issuing an environmental permit allowing it to operate.
“The Proposal Site has easy access from the A47 and the strategic highway network, which provides ready accessibility to the existing network of waste transfer stations throughout the County and connections to the neighbouring areas,” the statement says.
“The Proposal will be a generator of low carbon energy, a significant proportion of which will be classed as renewable and will deliver savings in greenhouse gas emissions from the commencement of its operation.
“The planning application demonstrates that there is an overwhelming need for the proposal to complement existing and future recycling and composting initiatives within the county, as part of an integrated waste management system.”
The document states that with “mitigation measures”, there will be “no likely significant environmental
effects”.
It concludes: “The proposal will make a significant contribution to the delivery of sustainable waste
management in Norfolk and in turn the spatial vision and key strategic objectives of the emerging Norfolk Waste Core Strategy.
“The Government places importance in the provision of sufficient opportunities for new waste management facilities of the right type, in the right place and the right time. The proposal implements these objectives”.
“The risk of its decision being tainted by the appearance of bias has only been heightened by the recent disclosure
that Conservative county councillors met prior to the county council’s March 7 cabinet meeting to determine how, en bloc, they would vote on the award of the PFI
contract to Cory Wheelabrator. They did vote to award it to Cory Wheelabrator.
“Unless called-in by the Secretary of State, the matter will be determined by a committee of Norfolk County councillors.
“Compared with a local public inquiry, that is not a forum in which the planning merits of the application can be fully tested and in which interested parties can make substantial and detailed contributions.
“Given these concerns, representations have been made to the Secretary of State to call the application in for his determination.”
Council leader Nick Daubney has also requested a meeting
with Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman, to “set the record straight”.
Leaked minutes of a meeting of the county council’s Conservative group have sparked calls for an independent enquiry.
The new report also sets out the council’s objections to the incinerator in detail. They include claims that the incinerator proposal is contrary to government policies, would discourage investment in the area, would be built in an area at high risk of flooding and damage important wildlife habitats.
The lengthy report begins by setting out the rationale behind the incinerator proposal, as detailed in the supporting planning statement lodged with the planning application.
These are summarised on the right. You can also follow the links to read the development control board report in full, or explore the full planning application and supporing statements on Norfolk County Council’s website.
The development control board report claims the incinerator fails to meet national policy and regulation, which requires that waste is reduced, reused or recycled prior to recovery.
“The size of the incinerator fails to meet sustainability criteria due to its location on the extreme west of the county and therefore does not support the proximity principle of dealing with waste where it arises,” it adds.
“The scale and the location of the facility will also draw in waste from across the borders of the county and squeeze out recycling and other more sustainable forms of waste treatment in neighbouring counties who plan to deal with their own waste.”
The report states if built, the incinerator would harm future investment in West Norfolk, particularly on the part of the food industry.
It adds: “Although difficult to quantify at the moment because of lack of evidence supplied with the application, the loss of potential employment resulting from the negative perceptions associated with the proposed development could be far greater than the small employment benefits provided by it.”
The report also states the proposed development is in an area at “high risk of flooding” and deposits would pose the risk of acidifcation to Roydon Common - a nature reserve and SSSI near King’s Lynn.
Councillors on the development control board - formerly the planning committee - are set to meet on Monday, July 25, to discuss the report. The meeting, which begins at 10am, is being held at King’s Lynn Corn Exchange.
If agreed, the council’s comments will be forwarded to the county council as part of the planning process, which has also seen the county council invite parish councils across Norfolk to submit their comments.
In a statement, Norfolk County Council said: “We welcome all responses to the Willows planning application. All opinions and comments received will be considered as part of the county council’s standard planning procedures.
“There is still time for people to have their say as the official consultation runs until Wednesday, August 3.”
Follow the links above to view and comment on the application online.
Latest News
- Gas leak at North Walsham home where woman had fallen sparks emergency call
- Freethorpe family thank East Anglian Air Ambulance after Strumshaw crash
- Jewellery and purse stolen from car parked in Yarmouth
- Antiques Roadshow comes to RAF Marham
- Motorcyclist was speeding before fatal A47 crash, inquest hears
Other News Articles
- Freethorpe family thank East Anglian Air Ambulance after Strumshaw crash
- Antiques Roadshow comes to RAF Marham
- VIDEO: Musicians and dancers from Rian perform outside St Andrew’s Hall in Norwich
- Artwork produced by the Kray twins to go up for auction in Norfolk
- As new powers are announced to tackle anti-social behaviour tell us your experience of nuisance neighbours and yobbish behaviour in Norwich.
- Gold medals for Norfolk nurseries at Chelsea Flower Show
- Man injured after unprovoked attack in Thorpe St Andrew
- Suffolk Punch foal born at Banham Zoo
- Burglars jailed for £90,000 string of Norwich house break-ins
- GALLERY: Celtic fans in Norwich in force for Adam Drury testimonial
36 comments
They kept coming in the same old way, and we kept taking them down in the same old way, or people with an open mind can shoot the nimbys down every time, but how this site is set up all we all are doing is repeating ourselves. Can this site be sorted out so it looks more like a forum but not a forum, and people can look through the whole chain of comments, I suggested when there was a forum you put articles and letters in there and we comment on them, this is sort of halfway there, but half aint good enough, it won't half stop all these nimbies spewling the same old crud out based on 'what they've heard' rather than facts and science the rest of us use. Come on admin, sort it out!
Report this comment
Jason Bunn
Thursday, July 21, 2011
bedoomed Very good point. Like most people in West Norfolk realise we cannot keep building air polluting companies when Kings Lynn’s air quality, On the request for scoping opinion report NCC088759 Quote “Concentrations of Nitrogen Dioxide within the King’s Lynn AQMA are at present above the annual mean objective of 40ugm3, as defined in the Air Quality Standards Regulations”. Besides the flooding issues and nobody in Norfolk wants an incinerator except Thorpe St Andrew, NCC are still using spin and underhanded tactics, taking the County into disrepute. As you say where is the gaffer Davis White. There is more than meets the eye going on here. This is very serious stuff when the Borough is taking legal action against NCC. I feel that Cory Wheelabrator have the same hold on NCC. It had taken 15 years to secure the Bexley incinerator. PFI is the dangling carrot or. NCC has neglected recycling for over 5 years and should be taken to task over this. What is the reward for NCC as they have gone all out war with the residents of West Norfolk? The will not take advise of all Norfolk’s MPs.
Report this comment
Choice
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
What has David White's role been in all of this? Preumably he concurs with his Head Of Legal Services advice.Shouldn't he be questioned more in public , before the application is heard?
Report this comment
bedoomed
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Peter J, I respond to you (at the fourth try) with the added authority kindly bestowed on me by Alecto. Pickles would not have a completely free hand, but would be subject also to the constraints imposed by the planning system. In particular, he would have to decide the application having regard only to national and local planning policy and taking into account other material planning considerations. His decision likewise is subject to challenge in the High Court. The obvious benefit to the residents of Norfolk is that this would lift the decision out of the hands of NCC and the local arena generally. Pickles would appoint a qualified planning inspector to hold a public local inquiry, at which expert evidence can be tested by cross-examination. It would probably last a number of days. The objectors would have a proper opportunity to be heard. After its conclusion, he would write a detailed and reasoned report setting out his recommendations to Pickles. (A report that I recently read in another incinerator inquiry ran to over two hundred pages.) Pickles, advised by senior civil servants in DCLG, would then decide whether to accept the inspector’s recommendations or to reject them. His decision letter would follow. In terms of everyone having a fair crack of the whip, contrast this process with what would happen in a couple of hours before an NCC planning committee.
Report this comment
John Martin
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
In principle I'm against the plans on unknown pollution problems over a number of years.I do believe a lot of the derision voiced here would've been lessoned if free electricity or combined heat and power for those who live in the vicinity, much like how they do in Austria or Germany. As the only benefits seem to be either for Palm or Cory in making money or cheap energy for themselves , the plans should be kicked out on them facts alone.
Report this comment
nrg
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Peter J, I respond to you (at the third try) with the added authority kindly bestowed on me by Alecto. Pickles would not have a completely free hand, but would be subject also to the constraints imposed by the planning system. In particular, he would have to decide the application having regard only to national and local planning policy and taking into account other material planning considerations. His decision likewise is subject to challenge in the High Court. The obvious benefit to the residents of Norfolk is that this would lift the decision out of the hands of NCC and the local arena generally. Pickles would appoint a qualified planning inspector to hold a public local inquiry, at which expert evidence can be tested by cross-examination. It would probably last a number of days. The objectors would have a proper opportunity to be heard. After its conclusion, he would write a detailed and reasoned report setting out his recommendations to Pickles. (A report that I recently read in another incinerator inquiry ran to over two hundred pages.) Pickles, advised by senior civil servants in DCLG, would then decide whether to accept the inspector’s recommendations or to reject them. Hs decision letter would follow. In terms of everyone having a fair crack of the whip, contrast this process with what would happen in a couple of hours before an NCC planning committee.
Report this comment
John Martin
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
When we were fighting the Costessey incinerator we were given to understand it was to be the first of five. Norwich, Kings Lynn, Thetford, Great Yarmouth and one to be decided. Obviously since then recycling rates have risen considerably, but I believe NCC are still looking to build more than one. (Also note that Costessey was quite prepared to accept an MBT and AD plant instead and it nearly went ahead. NCC decided it was too expensive - but they would have saved in the long run)
Report this comment
Norfolk Dumpling
Monday, July 18, 2011
yes we do need the secretary of state to step in if he can remain unbiased because if not Kings Lynn residents will be railroaded into something they don't want because the councillors obviously don't give a monkeys about the pollution that will be forced on the people. The roads will become more congested and suffer more wear & tear. I cannot understand why bring the waste to King Lynn when most of it will be coming from the east. Why can't the people concerned with the builing of this incinerator be truthful and do things in the open, could it be that pockets are being lined?
Report this comment
cobby
Monday, July 18, 2011
The decision should be taken by us, those who pay fior the extravagances and vague ideas of our councillors. There are no alternative plans unveiled for any other site, yet and there has been no adherence to the ten year old waste hirarchy. NCC has not encouraged business to reduce, reuse and recyle more, they have failed to act on an existing policy. I have lost all confidence in NCC's leadership, the conduct amongst themselves, their non cooperation with Norfolk councils, lack of democratic discourse and accountability. If NCC wants to burn waste we should recycle our own valuable metals from OUR waste, use the funds locally, we do not have to feed expensive PFI schemes by greed merchants, that waste belongs to us. Parishes awake and find contractors who pay you for your waste, who do not pollute the environment for our children.
Report this comment
ingo wagenknecht
Monday, July 18, 2011
“The town’s mayor John Ward, himself a Tory county councillor, was reported as claiming that savings of £8 million per year of the proposed 25-year contract compared to the cost of disposing of waste in landfill sites could not be disregarded”. I assume this is if the incinerator is situated at Kings Lynn. Why did he reject the incinerator being built at Costessey? Does he not realise there will be a greater saving if the incinerator were build at Thorpe St Andrew.
Report this comment
gromi
Monday, July 18, 2011
A call in of the planning application would trigger a full PUBLIC inquiry where the issues will be properly aired in front of an INDEPENDENT inspector over a number of days, rather than another stage managed event at County Hall. A call in so the Secretary of State makes the final decision is the only credible way forward.
Report this comment
84lrc
Monday, July 18, 2011
This Incinerator poll 2 candidates Cast In Order Norfolk County Council (Wilfred Pickles) Secretary of State (Mable) This poll sounds like "Have a Go" with Wilfred Pickles and wife Mable in the1940's 50's radio quiz with an audience of about 20 million The choice is a joke. Is it April 1st, don' insult our intelligence Yours sincerely South Lynn Senior Citizen (1 mile downwind)of proposed site
Report this comment
LFB
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Have people forgot what Eric Pickles did to the residents of Kings Cliff when he overturned a 98% vote against nuclear waste being dumped in their village when their Council had stopped the proposal in their favour. I would not vote for him if he was the last man on the planet. Put yourself in the shoes of the residents of Kings Cliffe, and ask them what they would think of us. So don't count me in. The thought rubbing salt into the wounds!!!!!! Pickles refused planning permission for Sherwood Forest incinerator he had no choice The site is clearly important to nature conservation and is surrounded by Sites of Special Scientific Interest.(SSSI) The greenfield site, owned by UK Coal and subject to a planning condition requiring restoration to heathland and woodland, is in the heart of Sherwood Forest, and is used by rare and protected bird species such as woodlark and nightjar.The application site is within an area (Sherwood Forest) known to support more than 1% of the total UK breeding populations of (woodlark and nightjar) Annex 1 species for the purposes of the Birds Directive. The (2009) East Midlands Regional Plan records that the area is being considered for designation as a Special Protection Area (SPA). The application site itself is known to support breeding woodlark and foraging nightjar. So don't put your money on Eric Pickles. The rest of Norfolk should vote against it. Yours sincerely South Lynn Senior Citizen (1 mile downwind of proposed site)
Report this comment
LFB
Sunday, July 17, 2011
The factors against the incinerator far out out weigh the so called advantages put forward by NCC
Report this comment
Maverick
Sunday, July 17, 2011
For anyone who has been following this issue closely and attended county council cabinet meetings it is clear the current leadership cannot be trusted and are predetermined to award planning permission regardless of the merits of this proposal or the affront to democracy it represents. Cabinet members understanding of the subject is so poor they have failed to answer very basic questions about it. Senior council officers have refused to retract their statements which have proven to be false. Originally I supported the incinerator thinking it was a good idea, after being challengeed to investigate the facts I discovered how badly the county council have mislead people. Once you have seen what is wrong with it you cannot simply forget.
Report this comment
Canary Boy
Sunday, July 17, 2011
The Sec of State should offer an unbiassed view on this. NCC are clearly in breach of the 'localism' ethic. Politics should never go against good scientific reasoning. As a scientific engineer I just need to know if these are safe or not, particularly in the percentage and weight levels of gases released and particulate levels. Other govt ministers can be called to provide scientific details if the decision is unsatisfactorly resolved by the Sec of State and local MPs can always request an independent review. I'm more interested in the scientific facts yet the 'localism' issue should imo be addressed by DC.
Report this comment
Dave01
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Of Course HE Should NOT get involved he sides with the council and the council sides with him involving him is a prescription for failure
Report this comment
John L Cooper
Sunday, July 17, 2011
If you are in any doubt as to the merits of the incinerator being sited in Kings Lynn, although I would not inflict incineration on any community, please have a look at the report that the borough council of Kings Lynn and West Norfolk have put together for the DCB meeting 25th July. They have listed 12 objections on material considerations and fully explained their reasons for doing so. Excellent work by all involved within a very short timescale. NCC cannot keep denying the serious failings of the whole project. The longer this continues the more of a financial drain on all the people of Norfolk. Please admit is was wrong to consider this facility in King's Lynn the application is against many, both local and central government, adopted strategies and policies. The reputation of both the conservative party and Norfolk County Council have taken a dreadful turn and both have lost the trust of the people of Norfolk. The poll result of 91% against NCC judging this application cannot be ignore. But then 65516 people who voted in a fully compliant referendum shuld not have been ignored either.
Report this comment
Joy, King's Lynn
Sunday, July 17, 2011
I agree that the County Council should not now determine the planning application. Clearly it is their responsibility, but given the huge outcry I don't think they could be impartial, and I don't think the public would accept any decision. But I must ask, what happens if Pickles does call it in and then gives it the go-ahead? The "localism" issue has nothing to do with a planning matter, which must be done on technical grounds alone.
Report this comment
Peter J
Sunday, July 17, 2011
I agree with Mrs Murphy. I gave up writing to Pickles. He is so not interested in people's views of local matters - which does not bode well for localism. However nothing could be worse that having the County Council determine the decision. But whoever does the determination one thing is sure. Unless this awful incinerator is consigned to the annals of history where it belongs, the decision will be challenged.
Report this comment
alecto
Sunday, July 17, 2011
NCC or Secretary of State? Not a great choice in my opinion. My recent letters to Eric Pickles on this subject did not even receive an acknowledgement. I suspect his first reaction would be to toe the party line. He has in the past, expressed his support for " Localism" so we can only hope that he takes the wishes of 65000 people into account. However, my concern is that he would consider his own position rather than the health and wellbeing of the population of West Norfolk
Report this comment
mrsmurphy
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Norfolk county council cannot have a say on this planning application, if they do there will be another high court action. Many people are talking of the location, my view is that the plan for this incinerator was never really, as a first concern, dealing with Norfolk's residual waste. If it had of been the location would, to comply with various NCC policies and strategies, have been the Norwich or Dereham area and the plant would have been much smaller. It is all a big smoke screen, the real intention as suggested many months ago by Tim East in the EDP is that Kings Lynn will be used to process excess waste from the London Gateway. It was suggested that rail freight, the harbour juction is still there although dissused, or water transport could be used. Remember Cory Environmental are now operating an EfW in Bexley with waste barged in, it would be very nice for them to have a sister facility in Norfolk. Cory Wheelabrator have already admitted that commercial waste will be accepted from Lincolshire and Cambridgeshire. The capacity of the facility is far larger than Norfolk needs and there was another drop in the level of predicted waste in the last financial year, a great deal of money was left over in NCCs budget due to that. We are told we will be encouraged to recycle more, there are talks of food waste collection SO WHERE WILL THE FUEL COME FROM TO FEED THE FIRE?
Report this comment
Canary Boy
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Is domestic waste recycling really a priority over finding ways of re-using business waste which is over twice the tonnage of domestic residual waste created in Norfolk? Government needs to cotton on to their own waste hierarchy !!
Report this comment
bedoomed
Sunday, July 17, 2011
The following is an excerpt from a report in the USA Boston Globe after a visit to the Wheelabrator Saugus Incinerator. This was prior to the latest breach of environmental law and subsequent 7.5 M dollar fine. In addition to generating enough electricity to power 47000 homes a day, the Incinerator - one of seven left in the state - releases a constant plume of Carbon Monoxide, Sulphur Dioxide, Nitrous Oxide, and an awful nose-burning stench. "Ah, the smell of money" John O'Rourke, the Incinerator's plant manager, joked during a recent tour. There are many people in West Norfolk who suspect that the smell of money has also effected this procurement process.
Report this comment
mrsmurphy
Saturday, July 16, 2011
The following is an excerpt from a report in the USA Boston Globe after a visit to the Wheelabrator Saugus Incinerator. This was prior to the latest breach of environmental law and subsequent 7.5 M dollar fine. In addition to generating enough electricity to power 47000 homes a day, the Incinerator - one of seven left in the state - releases a constant plume of Carbon Monoxide, Sulphur Dioxide, Nitrous Oxide, and an awful nose-burning stench. "Ah, the smell of money" John O'Rourke, the Incinerator's plant manager, joked during a recent tour. There are many people in West Norfolk who suspect that the smell of money has also effected this procurement process.
Report this comment
mrsmurphy
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Even those of us who have no knowledge of the planning system would be horrified by the prospect of Norfolk County Council deciding this planning application in the present circumstances. There must be a planning inquiry before an inspector. That is the only way in which a fair and unbiased decision will be reached. Should NCC try to grant planning permission, there will simply be a second set of proceedings for judicial review and I prophesy that it will be King's Lynn and West Norfolk County Council that will be the claimant on that occasion. When will NCC learn? How much more public money will have to be spent to bring this madness to a halt?
Report this comment
Nemesis
Saturday, July 16, 2011
It's a frightening prospect - but let's not be NIMBY about this - incinerators should not be built anywhere - there are other options rather than incineration or landfill. We need better recycling and maybe anaerobic digestion. We, the general public, are not all the experts but NCC should have explored all options rather than present us with an inappropriate form of waste disposal.
Report this comment
ilovewestnorfolk
Saturday, July 16, 2011
This country does not really believe in re-use despite it coming before recycling in the waste pecking order. Much more of the non domestic waste part of the proposed 268,000 tonnes has to be re-used. Also, where in Norfolk will the 55,000 tonnes of bottom ash be processed and what percentage will be used on Norfolk roads and at what cost? How variable will the reprocessed's materials cost be, is there a hidden subsidy, and for how long?
Report this comment
bedoomed
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Quite simply NCC has disqualified itself from any impartiality in this matter. Of course it must go to the Secretary of State. It will end up with an inquiry anyway. Not to mention any other kind of inquiry apart from by a planning inspector, that is.
Report this comment
Richard Woods
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Logistically (souurce) Norwich would be the answer, CO2 is best dumped over sea areas so maybe Gt. Yarmouth or Cromer. We are all still lacking unbiassed, scientific facts, so in the meantime I have to oppose in principle this application until I know what in engineering terms and science; at a particulate level is occuring. Why dont these people just say the real truth? I'm not biassed, I just dont know. I can find out thro my team of technical researchers but a project like this should not be of my concern, it now is, so I for one, need to know...let the truth win.
Report this comment
Dave01
Saturday, July 16, 2011
This all looks very murky with the perception that "deals have been done" outside of a fair and democratic process. I vote for a review by the Secretary of State and also consideration of other sites towards the centre of Norfolk, along the A11 corridor so as to reduce transport costs and pollution. NCC have got this very wrong and only a fresh and independent review will help settle this.
Report this comment
BureValleyPaddy
Saturday, July 16, 2011
A clearly worded poll, excellent!
Report this comment
Joy, King's Lynn
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Kings Lynn is not at the epicentre of waste production, Norwich is. Therefore the road miles travelled by heavy lorries has been maximised with the consequent penalties of CO2 and particulate pollution across the County. The local doctors are horrified that this installation is only 3 miles from the centre of a Market town and cancer specialists are scathing about the record of these incinerators. Wheelabrator is paying $7.5 million to local authorities in the USA for its casually dumped waste, the Secretary of State has stopped an incinerator at Nottingham and the Chancellor of teh Exchequer helped stop one in his constituency. When, for goodness sake, is common sense going to prevail.
Report this comment
Vernon Moyse
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Most of the waste is produced in the east of the county so it makes no sense siting it in kings lynn,NCC just want it their so it is not near norwich.
Report this comment
Steve33
Saturday, July 16, 2011
Dave01 I am with you on that but Kings Lynn is top heavy with pollution. Thorpe St Andrew looks a good place as they voted for an incinerator.
Report this comment
Knee deep In Toxic ash
Saturday, July 16, 2011
All that everybody needs to know are the facts. It's not political, are these things safe or not? Who can give an unbiased opinion? Who does anyone trust? As an engineer I guess these sites are safe if the small particles are not allowed into the air. Scrub (wash) the gases and there is no problem, waste water too if filtered for particles there should be no problem. CO2 may go up a bit, but it would in landfil anyway..
Report this comment
Dave01
Saturday, July 16, 2011