Parliamentary Report

Report

RCEP: Incinerator

Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution.

See the section of this page on an incinerator application.

Downwinders At Risk-100 Facts About the Incineration of Hazardous Waste

Downwinders At Risk-100 Facts About the Incineration of Hazardous Waste in Cement Kilns

Questions and Answers: Dioxins

FDA/CFSAN - Questions and Answers about Dioxins

Incinerator - Dangers

HEAL Utah: Davis County Incinerator - Dangers

Although older incinerators were much worse than today's, this article still provides some useful info.

Incinerator bad: Notts are you listening?

"... the existence of a major EfW incinerator for MSW in Nottingham appears to have had a negative effect on recycling rates in the city. In 1998/99, 49% of MSW was managed by means of incineration. In the same year Nottingham’s municipal household recycling rate was only 6%. The rate dropped to 4% in 1999/2000 and 2000/01, and in 2001/02 it was still one of the lowest in the country at 5%. Although the pressure of government targets is bound to result in recycling rates increasing here too, the planned extension to the Eastcroft incinerator may limit this increase."

source: report

County Council Contradictions

In the post below (County Council admits) you'll see some of the Council's own policies on environmental protection. Now count how many of their own policies the Council contradicts by proposing a 180,000 tonne waste incinerator in Mansfield.

Which of the following issues apply?

• Too close to residents - toxic dust, noise, smell, vermin, HGVs, ...
  
• Visual intrusion (e.g. 300ft chimney)
  
• Pollution of underground water source
• Degradation of ancient Sherwood Forest (acid rain?)

In addition to the above is the largely ignored air pollution issue, and its significant impact on human health!

Notts County Council: Your Waste Plan

Notts Environmental Plan:
"Encouraging greater public involvement and making information available is
an important factor in implementing the Plan. The Waste Local Plan has a
key role to play, because it is a public document and sets out the future of
waste management for Nottinghamshire. As part of the Plan's consultation
stages, the public has the right to comment and make representations on proposals in the Plan, which as a result may be modified."

You bet we do, we pay your salaries. You're there to serve the people.

County Council admits...

"One of the most serious pollution threats to water resources is the disposal of
non-inert waste in areas where groundwater is vulnerable and, in particular,
catchments of boreholes used for potable supply. In Nottinghamshire, the
main aquifers are classified by the Environment Agency as highly vulnerable
and are the Sherwood Sandstone and the Magnesian Limestone, which
together supply up to 80% of the County's drinking water."

"... However it is impossible, even with the best available technology,
to make a disposal site completely leak proof and there will be certain areas
where the risk to the aquifer is so great as to make waste disposal
unacceptable."

"POLICY W3.5
PLANNING PERMISSION WILL NOT BE GRANTED FOR A WASTE
MANAGEMENT FACILITY WHERE THERE IS AN UNACCEPTABLE RISK
OF POLLUTION TO GROUNDWATER OR SURFACE WATER OR WHERE
IT AFFECTS THE INTEGRITY OR FUNCTION OF FLOODPLAINS,
UNLESS THE HARM CAN BE MITIGATED BY ENGINEERING MEASURES
AND/OR OPERATIONAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS."

"... where potential dust nuisances are
identified, these should be kept away from sensitive areas, such as residential
properties and nature conservation sites where dust is likely to cause harm... "

"POLICY W3.10
WHEN PLANNING PERMISSION IS GRANTED FOR A WASTE
MANAGEMENT FACILITY, CONDITIONS WILL BE IMPOSED TO
SUPPRESS DUST GENERATION. SUCH CONDITIONS MAY INCLUDE:
(a) THE USE OF WATER BOWSERS ON HAUL ROADS;
(b) SCREEN BANKS;
(c) ENCLOSING DUST GENERATING FIXED PLANT AND MACHINERY;
(d) SITING DUST GENERATING OPERATIONS AWAY FROM SENSITIVE
AREAS;
(e) TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF OPERATIONS WHEN NECESSARY;
(f) THE USE OF TREE SCREENS WHERE RELEVANT."

"Household waste can attract vermin and so create a public health risk."

"... road traffic can have a significant environmental
impact on the countryside and residential amenity, and can cause structural
damage to the highway network. Conservation areas are also unlikely to be
suited to heavy traffic. The main problems caused by heavy lorry traffic are:
noise, vibration, mud, dust, spillage of waste materials, fumes, damage to
buildings, roads and highway trees, visual intrusion and a reduction in road
safety. These problems are, potentially, most severe where the public
highway adjoins the site access or lorry routes pass through residential areas."

"Lorry routeing can also be a major consideration in assessing the
acceptability of waste management proposals."

"POLICY W3.14
PLANNING PERMISSION WILL NOT BE GRANTED FOR A WASTE
MANAGEMENT FACILITY WHERE THE VEHICLE MOVEMENTS LIKELY
TO BE GENERATED CANNOT BE SATISFACTORILY ACCOMMODATED
BY THE HIGHWAY NETWORK OR WOULD CAUSE UNACCEPTABLE
DISTURBANCE TO LOCAL COMMUNITIES."

"Ancient woodlands represent an irreplaceable resource."

"POLICY W3.19
PLANNING PERMISSION FOR A WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY
WHICH WOULD DESTROY OR DEGRADE ANCIENT WOODLANDS WILL
NOT BE GRANTED. OTHER WOODLANDS OF AMENITY, WILDLIFE AND
RECREATIONAL VALUE WILL BE SAFEGUARDED UNLESS THEIR
VALUE IS OUTWEIGHED BY THE NEED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.
WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD INVOLVE THE LOSS OF SUCH
WOODLAND, THE LAND SHOULD BE RECLAIMED WITH AN
EQUIVALENT AREA OF WOODLAND."

source: Environmental Protection report

Given that the proposed Mansfield incinerator produces thousands of tonnes of toxic chemicals every year this question should be asked: will our water be safe? Not only is there the site of the incinerator to consider, there is also the hazardous landfill site for the toxic fly ash - which is to be located where exactly?

Also, why is a toxic fly ash production plant being located right next to residents? The above policy states "siting dust generating operations away from sensitive areas". Perhaps the county council think that the residents of Mansfield don't count!?

Open Directory - Society: Issues: Environment: Pollution

Open Directory - Society: Issues: Environment: Pollution

Crazy County Council

Notts Council report demonstrates crazy attitude:

"Nottinghamshire is fortunate in having its own municipal incinerator at
Eastcroft, Nottingham,..."

Yes they really do mean "fortunate"!

Why might this be?
Well a diagram in the report shows the happy world of incinerators where they can do no harm. There is no chimney or emissions on their incinerator - air pollution simply does not exist in their world.

Waste Local Plan - Nottinghamshire County Council

Waste Local Plan - Nottinghamshire County Council: "The current plan is therefore based on four key objectives:

* Protecting the environment.
* The efficient use of resources.
* Controlling pollution.
* Encouraging public awareness and involvement."

Let's evaluate the above within the context of the proposed incinerator at Mansfield:

"Protecting the environment"
- Incinerator exposes environment to about 100,000 tonnes of new emissions every year, producing global warming, acid rain, photochemical smog, carcinogens, heavy metals, particulates and dust. This destroys vegetation, pollutes the land and contaminates water. Significant impacts on human health too!

"Controlling pollution"
- See above.

"Encouraging public awareness and involvement"
- There has been very little of this from Notts County Council. Indeed even Mansfield District Council expect the county council to impose their [arrogant] policy on Mansfield. We shall see...

Incineration is not Sustainable

Incineration is not Sustainable
Incineration is not Sustainable

Incineration creates highly toxic pollutants, then spreads them over the population and its food chain. This is NOT a sustainable practice. These toxins accumulate in the environment, the food chain and in humans. The probability of exposure to carcinogens increases, along with your chances of cancer. (For the unborn there's increased chances of birth defects too.)

Incineration is not Sustainable
Incineration is not Sustainable

Comments and complaints form - Nottinghamshire County Council

Comments and complaints form - Nottinghamshire County Council

If you are opposed to Notts County Council's plan to impose an incinerator on Mansfield then here's an online complaint form. Complain to the county council via this form, and make sure you also complain by letter, phone, fax...

Make sure your feelings are heard.

Notts Contact Details here

Campaign to...

Letters are being written by campaigners, and sent to Malvin Trigg, NCC Director of Environment, County Hall, West Bridgford, Nottingham NG2 7QP

Incinerators are damn stupid and dangerous

Incinerator process:-

Input: harmless waste and some toxic (but confined) waste

Outputs:

• turn the harmless waste into new toxic chemicals and spread over the population and the land
• turn harmless waste into new toxic chemicals and bury in hazardous landfill
• take the confined toxic waste and spread over the population and the land

Result: newly created toxic waste ends up in plants, animals and humans, along with the input toxins that were originally confined.

Although the above process is so obviously bad that it's laughable, the real result is much sadness.

Transport of toxic fly ash

Mansfield to where?

The transport of thousands of tonnes of toxic fly ash by lorry also raises concerns - what route will those lorries take? Of course, the immediate vicinity are likely to suffer most from that (dust created whilst loading vehicles, etc.). Then there's the question of where will the hazardous landfill site be for burying this toxic waste!? It's ironic really: their policy is to reduce landfill but although the volume of landfill is reduced they will create perhaps 2000 - 9000 tonnes of extremely toxic fly ash landfill every year! Plus the toxic (but less so) bottom ash landfill. So the landfill area will probably be more toxic than traditionally.

Mansfield against incinerator meetings

TWO PUBLIC MEETINGS

Have been organised to:

DISCUSS MANSFIELD’S INCINERATOR PLANS

Notts County Council and Onyx have announced their proposals for a 26-year PFI contract that include the prospect of a waste incinerator to be built in
the Greater Mansfield/Ashfield area.

The only site mentioned by name is:
Crown Farm, Forest Town

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THESE PLANS, YOU CAN ATTEND BOTH MEETINGS:

Mansfield MP Alan Meale has called a meeting for Monday 15th August 2005, from 6 pm at the
Forest Town Social Club (Welfare)

And

MAIN (Mansfield Against Incineration), in conjunction with West Notts Friends of the Earth will meet on

Monday 22nd August, from 7:30 pm at
St Albans Church, Forest Town
Corner of Clipstone Road and Old Mill Lane

Both meetings are accessible by bus from Mansfield and Clipstone
Car parking available at Kingsway Hall & Forest Town Welfare

For further details contact foe.westnotts@gmail.com

A Case Study

MispelstraatMWIHealthImpact

Britain steps out of line on incinerators

Britain steps out of line on incinerators

Head of EU waste directorate points out that Britain is creating more incinerators, while the rest of Europe are against any more incinerators: they are regarded like nuclear reactors.

No Incinerators for Europe

No Incinerators for Europe

Onyx: worst case farce

Onyx hoodwink visitors asking about the risks

Incinerator operators have to do their own Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to pursuade the Environment Agency to give them a licence to operate [and pollute within guidelines].

The Onyx's EIA assumed a "worst case" scenario for the impact on nearby residents - using maximum permitted levels.

Can you spot the flaw in this farcical process!?

It assumes incinerators never exceed permitted levels.
In fact incinerators often run into problems and exceed permitted levels - all the Environment Agency does is send them a "warning", and then another, and then another, and...

The impact assessment is a farce.

But it gets worse than that. The company itself are responsible for monitoring pollutants and reporting their incidents to the Environment Agency!

There are no independent, continuous, pollution monitoring authorities to check what the incinerator emissions are. No one really knows what's happening!

WHO | Dioxins and their effects on human health

WHO | Dioxins and their effects on human health

World Health Organisation: Incinerators

World Health Organisation: Incinerators

WHO air quality guidelines - Second edition

WHO air quality guidelines - Second edition

Mansfield Against Incinerators Campaign

Mansfield Against Incinerators Campaign

Carcinogen - Cancer Causing

Carcinogen - Definition

Protesters 'shut down' incinerator

Protesters 'shut down' incinerator: "Greenpeace claims the incinerator routinely releases significant quantities of dioxins that the World Health Organisation classifies as causing cancer.

The plant is owned by the French multi-national, Onyx."

Onyx to burn 180,000 tonnes of rubbish in Mansfield

Onyx selected as the preferred bidder for a waste management contract with Nottinghamshire County Council (UK)

Onyx plan to build an incinerator that has a capacity of 180,000 tonnes per year. That means local residents will be directly exposed to many tonnes of air pollutants every year.

Onyx: Not a company you would want in your backyard

Lawsuit - Environmental Law - Sierra Club: "Proposed Suit Aims to Reduce Air Pollution from Onyx Incinerator"

" Onyx hazardous waste incinerator across the Mississippi River from St. Louis has a long and detailed history of repeatedly violating laws that normally protect residents from toxic air pollution. This history includes explosions that have hospitalized workers and plagued the neighboring communities with clouds of poisonous gas along with continued, long-term releases of cancer-causing air pollution and damaging mercury. The company recently applied for an operating permit that would do nothing to address the ongoing pollution problems or to resolve its continued violations. Sierra Club has now filed a notice letter with the federal administration to take a long and serious look at the permit, and to come up with a realistic plan that will properly manage the dangerous pollution. We hope that the EPA addresses our concerns for the health of local communities before the end of our 60-day notice period; if not, we will move forward with a lawsuit... "

Radioactive Waste Incinerators!

How stupid is this practice?

Some specially licenced incinerators - thanks to the Environment Agency (et al) - have permission to burn radioactive waste.

Given that fire doesn't neutralise radioactive materials, it is a licence to effectively grind up radioactive materials into microscopic particles and then disperse them across the region. How stupid is that!?

Incinerators Breeching Safety Levels

GREENPEACE UK: "Criminal damage: A review of the performance of municipal waste incinerators within the UK "

"no incinerator currently operating in England is able to meet the legal requirements of its license."
[comment: therefore, you can be sure that once you get an incinerator you'll have to live (and die) with it]

Conclusion

The figures in this report, provided as they are by the operators
themselves, clearly demonstrate two things. Firstly, even though the
parameters within which incinerators operate are based on what is
technologically achievable and not on what is safe for human health, no
incinerator actually operates within these limits. All of the incinerators in
this survey exceed their legal pollution limits and some of them have
performance records that are little short of appalling. The Sheffield
incinerator, for instance, has breached its legal limits on aerial emissions
178 times in the past three years.

Secondly, the regulatory regime is clearly inadequate. The range of
pollutants monitored is too narrow and the frequency of monitoring
completely incapable of establishing a reasonable picture of what is
entering the environment. The entire regulatory system is based on self-assessment
and the penalties are virtually invisible. Of the 546 breaches
of pollution limits in 1999 and 2000 there was only one prosecution for
aerial pollution (Sheffield in 1999 – the City Council was fined £18,000).

The conclusion to be drawn from this report is that incineration is an
unreliable and dangerous technology incapable of being regulated with
proper regard to human health and the environment. Current Government
proposals to permit a massive expansion in incinerator numbers in the UK
are clearly misguided and should be abandoned in favour of strategies for
waste reduction, reuse and recycling.

The current regulatory regime is extremely weak and needs to be
completely overhauled for the period that incinerators continue to operate
in the UK. Currently operating incinerators are clearly incapable of
functioning safely and should be closed as soon as technically possible.

Incinerators DO exceed safe emission levels

Greenpeace: Incinerators: "The report is based on data obtained from Environment Agency pollution registers and shows the following league table of pollution offences in 1999 and 2000:

Name of incinerator and Number of offences
Sheffield 156
Stoke 40
Coventry 90
Edmonton (N London) 25
Dudley 80
Tyseley 15
Wolverhampton 68
Cleveland 11
Nottingham 53
Lewisham 9"

Just What Kirkham Ordered: "It's a Good Thing"

Order placed for: 9,000 tonnes of toxic fly ash.

Source: Proposed waste incinerator at Crown Farm, Mansfield, Nottinghamshire.

Destination: David Kirkham's front garden - address to follow.

Method of delivery: Convoy of 300 HGV lorries.

When: After 1 year's operation of incinerator - that's the amount of toxic fly ash they'll need to dump somewhere.

Why: In Kirkham's own words: it's a good thing. That's what he currently thinks anyway - as leader of the irresponsible, unaccountable and arrogant Nottinghamshire County Council.

Onxy: Controversy in Sheffield

Incineration

Mansfield Incinerator: Serious Impact on Miners' Health

It is well known that the type of air pollutants emitted from an incinerator cause breathing difficulties and health problems. For the many former miners around Mansfield, Forest Town and Clipstone that already have breathing difficulties and health problems this additional impact could be serious.

For this reason, and others, the location of a permanent emissions source in Mansfield is not acceptable. The morbidity and mortality rate will be too high. [Too much illness and premature death.]

An incinerator in or around Mansfield is not acceptable.

Incineration and Health

FOE Briefing: Incineration and Health

UK waste going up in toxic smoke

Friends of the Earth: Press Release: FOE HITS OUT AT PRO-BURNING WASTE STRATEGY.

Comment:
A policy to incinerate rubbish causes a national problem. It spreads the land with layer upon layer of toxic dioxins and other carcinogenic substances.

Then you wonder why 1 in 3 people are getting cancer!?

Onyx: Explosion at Incinerator

To burn or not to burn A waste of good rubbish?

Can Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, look forward to a safely managed incinerator? Doesn't look that way, does it.

Mansfield Incinerator Open Meeting

An open meeting to discuss the proposed incinerator at Crown Farm.

Date: 15 August 2005, 6pm
Venue: Concert Room, Forest Town Social Club, Nottinghamshire

If you care, be there.

Mansfield incinerator toxin zones map

Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, are proposing to improve their air quality (that's their council's alleged objective anyway) by sticking a waste incinerator in it. Now of course we all know that incinerators emit pollutants - that's why they build massive chimneys to take all the toxins high up away from ground level. But of course they don't stay up there forever - they disperse and fall to the ground. You then breath them in, or eat food contaminated with those toxins.

The following diagrams illustrate where the pollution hotspots are likely to be. That means extra health risks, leading to cancer, and death; and possibly falling house prices.