BREAST cancer rates in Jersey will soar because of emissions from the new £106 million incinerator, a UK doctor warned yesterday as a national campaign against its technology got under way.
Dr Dick Van Steenis, a member of a group campaigning against the building of energy-from-waste plants across Britain, said that local rates of infant mortality, asthma, lung cancer, heart attacks and other heath problems would also rise significantly. And he claimed that Island taxpayers would be left to pick up the bill as health costs rose massively. Island health officials have robustly rejected the claims and insist that the new energy-from-waste plant is safe.
Dr Van Steenis (pictured) made his comments as local pressure groups all over Britain voiced health concerns about plans to build up to 30 energy-from-waste plants similar to the one planned at La Collette. They are mobilising because councils are coming under pressure from Westminster to build new incinerators to meet EU waste targets by reducing reliance on landfill sites.
Dr Susan Turnbull, the Deputy Medical Officer of Health, said that she did not know of any links between breast cancer and air pollution. She stressed that the Health Protection team had been closely involved in discussions about the new energy-from-waste plant.
Article posted on 25th September, 2008 - 3.00pm
33 Article Comments
Does nobody understand this all about rubbish? The root problem is that we just love to shop for more rubbish. No matter what we do, most people will want to live and hence will generate even more rubbish. Our options are stark:
1. recycle is fine but we then have to pay somebody to buy our rubbish; whilst the transport of all this rubbish adds to our carbon footprint;
2. landfill is out as we have no holes to fill;
3. the health risks of untreated rubbish begs a calamity;
4. incineration is not perfect, but we have to do something.
Let’s just do it!
Report abuse
not really rocket science is it? what you breathe in affects your health. But as long as no one can conclusively prove that their baby died as a result of huge quantities of toxins being burned about a mile away from residential areas … the states can relax over any future compensation claims or indeed any responsibility.
This should have all been sorted out years ago, and as one of the richest islands in the world we could have one of the most advanced and enlightened refuse management programs in the world … it could have been so good. Once again the states are behaving shamefully.
Report abuse
Thats nice for you Mark. I live right next door to the proposed sight. Why can’t they do it in a less populated area like st Ouen or that side. Oh that’s right because the rich and ministers live there and don’t want it on their doorsteps!
Report abuse
Mark
I agree with points 1-3.
I fundimentally disagree with point 4.
Point 5 Commission a Gasplasma or Plasma Gasification facility instead. Much less wasteful, cleaner and cleaner for a similar job. Search Wikipedia.
Report abuse
Recycling works great in some places and has cut down carbon footprint because bin collections are fortnightly, it balances out in the end. The difference is that the councils where it works have really put proper systems in place and made the consumer find it difficult to NOT recycle.
Report abuse
The discussion on the proposed new incinerator this week shows at least someone is thinking about our health and wallets. Thank you for bringing Dr Van Steenis over to inform us of the risks and show that there are less costly and polluting alternatives to erecting a megalithic incinerator upwind of St Helier.
The acceptance of an incinerator at all, once again shows the knee jerk tunnel vision way our politicians respond to long term problems facing the Island. There’s never an informed debate, the views of the population are ignored, look at GST, they only see the problem at hand (in this case waste disposal), not the wider picture or long term implications (in this case our health and costs to the tax payer.)
It beggers the question, if the new incinerator is a risk to health then what the hell is the currently one doing to us? And what is Guy De Faye, as Minister in charge, doing to protect us? Absolutely nothing. This is a man who shows ignorance about health and safety issues and contempt for those who know what they are talking about. Look at his comments on seat belts in the face of medical evidence.
What gets me is how a person who failed to achieve an all island mandate and was only voted in as Deputy, by a miniscule percentage, holds this responsible position? To my mind he shows neither the qualities of character nor education to fulfil this role adequately but regardless there he is dictating our future. I’d like to know if he can be replaced in time before we’re stuck with his legacy of toxic pollution until the day we die – literally.
Report abuse
I live at Havre Des Pas and my family are already sick because of the compost site, let alone the new incinerator. Guy de Faye and his “friends” said the smell in the area was seaweed for several years and only now admit it is coming from the compost site, so I would not believe him when we says the new incinerator is going to be safe !!!!
Report abuse
Recycling is the way to go rather than building another incinerator! The problem is Jersey make it so difficult for us to recycle.
How about we stop benefits to those who can’t find work or are too “depressed” to work – they can recycle our rubbish (giving them a feel good feelin) and we in turn can give them benefit!
Give us someone in the states that’s willing to do what is best for the community and not what’s easiest for their wallets!
Report abuse
This island is a “miserable failiure”.
I was walking down havre des pas last week and said to my wife what a scruffy place steeped in a time warp.
The town’s the same,you would never know Jersey was a rich place by the state of the place.
Dirty cracked pavements scruffy streets everywhere
you name it.
The Dr has highlighted the dangers of this awful incinerator, however just watch the states walk over the people and have it built.
Report abuse
Lucy i agree with getting those who ‘can’t’ find work to work in recycling, but unless you experiene depression or know anyone who has then i suggest that you research the illness before commenting.
I stand by what i said before. Why not put it on the otherside of the island, but oh no we can’t because thats where the states members live.
Report abuse
Honestly, do they think we are all stupid? I spent 20 years in the U.S. and have constantly seen newspaper articles on medical topics, outlining exactly how much the constant pollution in L.A. and Orange county is causing all types of cancer, including breast cancer. When I left Jersey, I never had to use an inhaler, except when I spent time around a dog. Now, I am on two different antihystamines and two inhalers – one to bring down lung inflammation. Yes, they have to get rid of the rubbish somewhere – but as someone else suggested, lets stop being like the Americans with this “throw away’ mentality. Let’s go to more car boot sales and thrift shops. Make furniture and clothing last longer. It used to be that we would buy on the more expensive side – less items but better quality, but nowadays everyone wants to buy more cheaply and get new next year (or sooner). Hopefully someone will listen to the common sense coming from the UK.
Report abuse
My reply
4 Rob Whittle – I appreciate your comments and agree that as a rich island we should be leading the way with cutting edge technology. Nevertheless, this should have been sorted out years ago.
3 Sarah – I cannot agree that St Ouen would be a better site:
1 – St Helier is the epicentre of both population and business; hence the centre of rubbish generation;
2 – the transport all that rubbish across the island would create a new environmental hazard on our roads;
3 – recycled metals, like old cars, are best processed near the docks;
4- and no, I am neither rich no a resident of the west. I can see the La Collette chimney from my house.
What we need is some pragmatic ‘green’ leadership and less grandstanding. I just hope that the smarter politicians are plugged into this online JEP debate.
Report abuse
on a complete tangent … a reply to phil … sorry that you are suffering from asthma … i’ve had it for over thirty years, but one of the best remedies i’ve come across is the buteyko breathing technique (google it) … really worth looking at.
Report abuse
Lucy,
We have very good news……..We offered the Island executive(never mind their consulting engineers)the bees-knees in the very best biowaste minimisation technology as opposed to incineration by one of the world’s most highly respected specialist firms who have been in the business for more than 75 years!! – and who to date, have built more than 600 massive and small mass-burn,energy recovery incinerators and biomass boiler plants.
The offer was to build a fully Climate Change compliant waste processing plant with carbon neutral biomass, mult-megawatt CHP with a seawater desalination plant working off the turbine bypass steam to produce 1000 (one thousand) tons of potable water (totally nitrate free) per day by means of vacuum vapour distillation for the JWC.
Lucy…there is no need for handsort recycling.This is done away with completely because the whole of the black bag and commercial waste goes into machinery developed and in use in dozens of world-wide locations that streams everything out that can be compacted and reused by industry.
Glass is reduced to shard free, fine grain granules. Plastic – hard and soft is streamed out and compacted for export. Ferrous metal is snatched of the line by overband electro-magnets, Non-ferrous metals (aluminium drinks cans etc) are blown off line by eddy current ( this works opposite to magnetic current)and then both ferrous and non-ferrous materials are crushed and baled for export.
All bio-waste from kitchens and other sources are pulverized and screened out for aerobic treatment and then dried and turned into biomass,pellet fuel.
Paper,card,shredded wood – in fact all cellulosic materials derived from living trees and plants ( non-fossil) is streamed off line and processed into a hard density, carbon-neutral fuel.
Vehicle tires are reduced to metal free crumb for all manner of uses.
Builder rubble is reduced to aggregate.
In all reducing waste to almost zero for landfill.
Small batteries are streamed out of the process lines -along with other visible hazardous materials.
The carbon-neutral, fully Kyoto Protocol emissions compliant bio-fuel is then combusted in the Volund, biomass boiler to produce multi-megawatt power for the Jersey Electricity Company and heat for local commercial premises such as perhaps the RadissonSAS hotel.
This heat is worth thousands of pounds to the States coffers
As said previously, the exhaust steam is bled to the Alfa-Laval plant to produce enough potable water to serve the greater part of St.Helier with it’s daily requirement.
The biomass combustion is clean and works at high temperature because it is made as a high c.v. 19kV/kg fuel and very importantly – produced only 8 tons of CLEAN bottom ash per 100 tons of feedstock AGAINST as much as 30 tons per 100 tons of incinerator combusted crude waste that in all probability will cause yet another BIG disposal head ache because it will now contain large quantities of lime based gas scrubber sludge and large concentrations of heavy metal contaminated fly-ash. That’s a nice one for Dr Rosemary Geller to dig her Public Health spoon into for her elevensie cup of coffee. I’d have thought the disgusting Bellozanne plant was warning enough that however complex and advanced the French incinerator might be – it will in fact be producing far higher concentrations of contaminants for disposal than ever before. Well now…how do we come to that conclusion!? EASY !! – everything that was previously blown up the chimney – dioxins, furans etc., become locked in the bottom ash, scrubber lime slops and fly-ash.
And oh !! why did the great and powerful reject the BWV/Art? Alfa-Laval consortium offered for a mere £65.8 million – against the CNIM incinerator/enabling works cost of £106+ million!! !? I’ll tell you why – It was because it is deemed unsuitable technology for poor little Jersey.
Final point – we even offered to finance the whole turn-key plant over 20 years, have it up and fully operatinal within the time-frame allowed for the CNIM plant. our offer also covered responsibility to ship all of the recovered recylables off island.
NOW…… WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN BETTER THAN THAT ??
Report abuse
Before shooting from the hip about cancer risks from the proposed burning of waste at La Collette. I believe it worthwhile to ask the Public Health about how many local resident cancer and other illness cases have been reported within the Bellozanne plant area compared with other parishes.
Report abuse
Good to see the Chief Medical Officer has come out fighting, demonstrating that detailed and expensive investigations have been carried out proving that a new incinerator will have significant benefits compared to the existing aged incinerator.
Dont be fooled by the myth that gasification perfect. There are very few plants operating the Plasco plant only has a small pilot plant running in Ottawa. It is not pollution free, just google Plasco and you will see the plant still gives off harmful HCL, NOX, SOX etc, they are having problems getting this plant operating at full rates (thats on their website)
Also dont be fooled when they say it produces non toxic residues, if heavy metals go into the process, you cant destroy them (as it is not a nuclear reactor!) so the residues will still contain toxic heavy metals. The amount of heavy metals is a function of what was in the rubbish, not the type of technology.
Another fact that was omitted was whilst gassification maybe reasonable for household waste, this is not the only waste the island produces, the bulky and commercial waste cannot easily be handled by a gassifier, as it needs to be shredded into very small pieces to allow it to be put through the process. This is very expensive, labour intensive, and requires significant maintenance of the mechanical machines.
Dont also be fooled by the economic quotes, gassifiers may initially be cheaper to install, but as they operate at high temperatures, have lots of moving machinery, they will be significantly less reliable, extremely expensive to maintain, and very labour intensive to run. As there are no gassifiers that have run for any length of time, this cannot be proved, but fairly obvious when you look at the gassification process.
Do we want to be left with an unreliable plant that may need replacing in less than 10 years?
The main political objectors to the incinerator, Eg Crowcroft, Duhammel etc, have been in the States for many years and have done nothing about sorting out the emmissions from Bellozanne, now one of the dirtiest plants in Europe. St Helier talks about recycling but has done nothing, leaving it to the minnows at St Johns to show them the way. I hope the voters bear this in mind when deciding who to vote for.
Modern incinerators are 100 of times cleaner than Bellozanne, and produce lower emissions than say the JEC power station, which has no gas cleaning. Putting it another way every year Bellozanne continues to run, is the equivalent of a new plant running for 100 years from a pollution point of view. We cant afford to delay any longer.
Report abuse
Lucy… how dare you belittle this life-paralysing illness that I have and suggest that recycling your rubbish would give me a ‘feel good feelin’. You clearly have NO idea what depression is!
We live in a society today where the minute someone has a bad day they say they are ‘depressed’. Well these inconsiderate imbeciles just make life even harder for people who have real depression!
I suffer from the most extreme form of depression due to years of trauma (NO fault of my own). I guess I hadn’t suffered enough from that so now I get to have depression. I fight harder than you can possibly imagine to beat this illness and live a ‘normal’ life but sometimes it wins. I don’t claim benefits, I work as many hours as possible and pay my taxes… People with REAL depression do everything they can to work, to socialise, to live a ‘normal’ life, they are some of the toughest, most inspiring people in this world.
I only hope you never have to experience the true horror of this paralysing condition. For people with depression life is hard enough without thoughtless comments from people like yourself!
Report abuse
Re opening paragraph of my letter of the 27th, Sept. In case of identity confusion – The incinerator / biomass boiler plant company referred to is Babcock Wilcox Volund of Denmark; who have been in the business for more than 75 years, and whilst still in the business of building waste to energy incinerators – they now offer advanced design engineering ( as described above ) with materials recycling and recover all useful materials and biomass combustion to minimises “bad” carbon emissions to atmosphere within the Kyoto Protocol requirement.
The plant would operate 8000+ hours a year producing:
(a)Revenue earning high quality constant,6.9 multi-megawatt/h 24/7 electric power. (reducing dependence on imported French power).
(b)Revenue from the supply of massive quantities of hot water to local commercial premises – thus,reducing dependence on highly expensive imported burning oil and gas.
(c)Revenue from the production of up to 7,326 million gallons of potable water.
(d)Revenue from the sale of mechanically recovered, and baled ferrous and non-ferrous metals.
(e)Revenue from the sale of mechanically recovered, and baled plasics (PET etc.,)
(d)Revenue from the sale of mechanically recovered, and baled textiles
(e)Recovery of metals and rubber from shredded and crumbed motor vehicle tires.(reuseable for road resurfacing etc.,)
All other combustibel materials are made into high density, high calorific value carbon-neutral fuel for the biomass BWV – CHP plant.
As described, the whole process is modular, computer controlled and electronic eye selected – all in accordance with well established, tried and tested engineering.
The company would undertake the export of all compacted and baled materials.
This is reality – the reality of rreal waste processing economics and solid waste minimisation for the least possible price.
Report abuse
In response to Tony Durbin,
Sounds like your process requires lots of people round a picking belt picking out the nasty elements, such as batteries circuit boards etc, hope it does not smell, and pity the poor people who have to work there.
Another wonderful process which promises to be totally clean, but in reality is not possible. For example treated timber contains CCA’s (Chromium Copper Arsenates) remember the Crabbe problems a few years ago. This highly toxic chemical will go into your bio boiler (which is basically an incinerator) these CCA’s will either go into the botom ash, in the gas cleaning, or directly to the atmosphere, so no different to the incinerator anyway. Mr Durbin omits to explain how his emmissions are cleaned, even the treated fuel will contain pollutants which will need cleaning and produce toxic residues.
Is there a fully running plant of this type, there are indeed bio mass boilers, which if were were just burning green waste would be great, but the plant has to run on all wastes.
Its a bit like saying I’ve got 4 wheels, but I have not got the car working yet, but each of the components works so it must work!
I quite agree that the recyclables should be extracted from the waste, but at source is far better as the materials are then of a high quality, and hence higher value, so Metal, Glass and plastics should not even go into the bin.
Also worth pointing out that most incinerators recycle all their bottom ash as building aggregate, so that only leaves a much smaller amount of gas cleaning residue, which is toxic, however it is only as toxic as the waste people throw into their bins, so if the components containing heavy metals etc are not put into bins, eg batteries, electronic goods etc, the gas cleaning residue will be less toxic.
However there is one good idea in Mr Durbins letter, some of the heat from the new incinerator should be used in district heating, or even a desalination plant this would make the incinerator more energy efficient, which has to be a good idea.
Report abuse
Well said Leah, depression is a very serious illness I know all too well about having spent 15 years on and off varying medications. I might add that I have in that 15 year period spent perhaps 4 weeks TOTAL off work as a result of my illness ! There are far too many bone idle people ‘claiming’ depression who know absolutely nothing about what real depression is, or else have no inclination to get help for their problems – counselling can help if you find a good one.
On the subject of the incinerator – When are the states going to sit up and take notice of the massive problem pollution is causing on a world wide scale? Jersey may only be a small place in comparison but that does not mean we can ignore our responsibility to the planet and do our best to look after it. Sadly with the states it seems it is more a case of whose on the backhanded payroll than which solution is best for OUR island.
Report abuse
As a fomer member of the Jersey Environment Forum, I can tell you that the debate you have been having on this site has been going over and over the same arguments that the States have been going over for at least three years to my knowledge. What is lacking here is not technology but leadership. The States of Jersey are paralysed by indecision and their complete lack of vision. Meanwhile Bellozane falls apart and emits some of the most toxic fumes in Europe. Reduce. Reuse. Recycle. ACT.
Report abuse
So the scenario seems to be that burning the waste after extracting the recyclables is the way forward. Surely not, isn’t there a company already buildig several programmes that will take this residue (what we call a biomass)and convert this to the renewable fuel Ethanol suitable for substitution for petrol/gasoline. There is enouigh material in this States of Jersey to make this fuel economically for a fraction of the capital cost of the Babcock plant and it will only need a minimum gate fee for treatment of the waste…considerably less than either CNIM or the Babcock proposal and as soon as the project is paid for then the gate fee will be reduced to a zero cost. No toxic fumes, no chimneys, no smells as all is treated in a water bath.
However let’s not be too parochial here we can build a common plant like that proposed for other countries for both Jersey and Guernsey for the same cost as building a single plant in Jersey…a double benefit to the Channel Islands.
Didn’t President Sarkozy say that Incinerfation is the last resort of treatment in his opening address as he accepted the Prersidentship of France? Of course he did, and it is about time thatwe in Jersey and Guernsey and our friends in the Uk Ireland and elsewhere finally stood up and said to our Representatives in Senate in Parliament in the Dail/Sennead Eireann and across the rest of Europe that WE CAN’T AFFORD INCINERATION IT IS TOO COSTLY IN BOTH CAPITAL AND MAINTENANCE COSTS AS WELL AS IN ENVIRONMENTAL AND HUMAN HEALTH COSTS.
Report abuse
Lets just go through Tony Durbins latest:-
1. OK Babcocks have been making boilers for 75 years, so have many other boiler manufacturers, but how long has the plant of the type recommended for Jersey been operated? Does a comparible size plant even exist?
His Point a) Not quite sure what a multimegawatt hour is , not a SI unit ? I assume you just mean megawatthour. I understand the new incinerator will also produce electricity but instead 10MWh 24/7, I suppose its a balance in producing electricity or district heat / water. Judging by the summer we have had we have no shortage of water. But the debate for district heating is a good one, obviously would require significant infrastructure costs, but would generate an income. The Electricity would just tie into the existing Grid.
Point b and C see above, balance between electricity and other energy uses.
point d ferrous metal is also separated out from the new EFW.
point e my understanding of plastic recycling is that plastics only have a decent value if separated out into the different types, I think there are 8 different types, this process just bales them all together so will attract very low values, take off the shipping and will not generate an income. Far better to separate at source to get best price, eg separate out all plastic bottles and get premium rates.
(second point d) I cant see baled fabrics having any real value especially after shipping and baling costs, Current scheme operated for Oxfam is far better where the high quality clothes are collected for charity, and either sold for as a valuable income source or reused by the worlds needy.
Second point E I cant see crumbing of tyres being commercially viable on Island, the volumes are not high enough, again shipping would be expensive, but worth considering. How the remaining parts of the tyres or other combustible waste can be called a bio fuel or carbon neutral is beyond me, or is it a case of using the buzz words to make the process sound any good.
I still dont agree that the separation of these materials will be that good. Eg if you have a plastic bottle with a tin can stuck on it , will this be separated as metal or plastic. The value of recyclables is only any good if the product is uncontaminated, no automated process is capable of this precise separation, so we are back to the picking belts.
Final point – Where is current example of this plant, not just parts of it. I seem to remember a Mr Hayden Taylor telling us he could do the same, and his only reference plant was a small pilot scale plant in Wales which never operated fully?
Report abuse
The States were offered the total clean solution over a year ago but suppressed it. Does someone want solutions or expensive toys?
An article in the Chartered Institution of Wastes Management Journal for Sept 2008 and the Defra Waste New Technologies Catalogue 2007 update, which came out in June 07, are required reading by all public bodies having waste disposal responsibility.
Report abuse
So lets look at the points raised by Messrs Harry/Andre
The BWV/ART plant machinery is enclosed and fully automatic and fitted with air classifiers, grading screens and other engineering for waste separation and material recovery.There is no hand picking line.
The nearest island, reference plant is at Forrest Road Isle of Wight. This is a second generation source separation plant designed by what is now the now ART design team and built in the 1980s for the IOWCC. This plant is still working well,and being updated presently with ENER-G mult-megawatt combustion – to replace the Beal’s chaingrate stoker,high pressure boiler serving a 2mW(e) Compus Murray steam turbine with fully operational lime activated gas scrubbers and fly-ash bag filters. The combustion plant burnt high density pellet fuel made from the scrap paper and lightweight plastics etc.,and was built by ESL to my design and operated faultlessly for a total of qround 150,000 hrs.
The chimney emissions were/will be clean and fully monitored to UK government, EU standard.
The power output was/is fed into the local grid;to earn a significant income under the then Non Fossil Fuel Agreement.
We would be putting a more modern version of the engineering on Jersey using the very best waste separation technology, constructed by Babcock,Wilcox Volund / ART / Alfa-Laval for a saving of at least £30 Million on the cost of the French design incinerator; releasing capital for other essential projects.
Hands up those who have an idea where this saving could be better spent !?
We agree source separation is desireable but not critical. Indeed, how many householders will bother with blue box separation.
Treated timber scrap – I wasn’t aware there is any on the Island sufficient to cause concern and should any of it find its way into the boiler fuel it will be so insgnifcant there is nothing to worry about – especially so as the
Volund biomass boiler plant has FLAKT gas scrubbers and fly-ash filters fitted to take care of noxious/toxic emissions.
Please also note there are no significant hyrochloride and sulphur dioxide acids and other undesireable chemicals in the emissions to burn the combusion chamber metals away AS IS THE CASE WITH THE BELLOZANNE INCINERATOR.
A fine example of the Volund multi-megawatt CHP biomass boiler technology for the combustion of selected bio-waste fuel is fully operational at Strangnas – Sweden.
A similar plant would be located at La Collette – fired with high c.v 17mJkg carbon neutral fuel made in the resource recovery plant.
We can increase this c.v. to 20mJ/kg by the addition of not more than 6% food-wrapper plastic – as allowed by EU Directive.
Should you wish to know more, pleaswe check out BWV/Advanced Recycling Technlogies/Alfa Laval on the internet.BWV is also part of the giant engineering company McDermott Inc.,builders amongst many thing,of enormous deep sea oil well platforms and rigs.
We are very pleased that both Harry and Andre have raised interesting points – and think they may perhaps have some first hand experience in the waste processing business ?
All other points are easily answered re tires and for plastics etc., for off-island export
Finally, please DO NOT compare us with Mr Haydon Taylor. We know all about his efforts.
Report abuse
If there is a slightest doubt then a report should be commissioned.
Dr Gellar might well be able to deflect the issue publicly and indeed she can afford to because she will not be in that position when any cases of ill-health become apparent in ten, twenty or thirty years’ time. She will not be personally liable for any negligence.
Report abuse
I’m not getting into the technical debate here, don’t know enough about it.
However, it is fairly easy to get the public to separate their waste for recycling, you simply MAKE them. It is nice to ask, but you plans will always be foiled by the inherently lazy!
In Aboyne (Aberdeenshire) the grounds of the local school and community hall have recycling bins that are easily identifiable… everyday you will see parents making use of these units while dropping their kids off at school, others can do it on their way to swimming or the cinema. Doing it this way means taking literally seconds out of their day. For the kids of these schools recycling is the norm and they just do it through habit.
Aboyne have FORTNIGHTLY garbage collections from homes for any food waste or other non-recyclables so your average household has no option but to recycle, otherwise their garbage builds up.
Obviously this system is not ideal for flats, but you already have better bin systems for your flats than in most of the UK so recycling bins could presumably be put in there.
So:
1) Put the bins somewhere that people will be going anyway (schools, supermarkets…)
2) Cut down refuse collections so people have no option but to recycle.
3)Run adverts (or use leafleting) to educate people on what is allowed in each bin (also clearly mark this on the bins themselves)
I spent just a WEEK in Aboyne having to recycle (I prefer to anyway but I discovered that my own Council simply send it to landfill!) and having been back a MONTH I still find myself not putting card, plastic or tins in the bin, just to be reminded that I have to just do that here!
Stop asking people and just TELL them to do it, but be sensible and make it as easy as possible for them.
Report abuse
In Response to Tony,
Looks like some good debate is opening up.
I’m still a bit confused at how you say the process is carbon neutral, my understanding of this is that all components of the waste would have to be from renewable sources, which as some polythene, poly-styrene etc are in the wastes these are synthetic man-made products so how can they be carbon neutral?
Your costings of £65.8 million look impressive
but are you comparing like for like? I think not.
For starters the 106 million is for a grand over the top design by Hopkins, many millions could have been saved here for starters, just look at the Portsmouth Plant, just looks like many of the other industrial units, in fact most people would not know it was there, and only visible from a distance, eg from the M27. So why are we spending millions extra on a designer tin box. Its an industrial building in a industrial part of the island, why try to make it look like a sports centre?
Can I also ask whether your company actually went through the tender process? or did you just throw in a price on the back of a fag packet towards the end of the tendering process. If you went through the tender process and were rejected, presumably the public will be able to see the reason you were rejected. Thus demonstrating that us taxpayers are not paying over the odds for the french option.
In summary, I’m not pro incineration, and am open to any technology. However unlike many people I’m not easily bluffed by the buzwords, totally clean, carbon neutral, or that recycling is the answer to everything as often these statements are not actually true. Everything has its place, and needs to be evaluated based on both cost and environmental impact. For example people think paper recycling is wonderful, and they are doing their bit for the planet, but are they? How much CO2 and pollution is produced shipping it, what nasty chemicals come out of the inks during recycling, how much energy is used to process it etc etc, If it is used as a fuel in an Energy from waste plant, it produces energy eg electricity, it also produces CO2 etc so are they both bad? or should we just plant more trees to carbon offset it, at least make them fruit trees because the price of fruit almost unaffordable now.
Report abuse
Lets get real and put a bit of reality into the incinerator argument.
Not only is our current incinerator out of date but it is now pumping tons of toxic chemicals into the air. Its well past it’s sell by date and costing US millions of wasted pounds to keep running.
That whilst recycling sounds good there is a long process between the separation of rubbish to actually recycling this into a useful commodity. This process is normally expensive and polluting, leaving a far larger carbon and toxic footprint than incineration. With little industry on our little rock we cannot recycle ourselves but have to export creating further pollution and waste.
May I suggest that the likes of Leah who keep referring to the UK as some metropolis of recycling perfection should examine more closely the facts. In the UK they dump most of their rubbish in huge landfill sites which will remain toxic for thousands of years. That many councils who have set unrealistic levels for separation and are enforcing this using covert surveillance and entrapment techniques which should have amnesty international out in protest. The penalties for even the smallest technical breach are more severe than robbery or many violent offences. Fly tipping is common and the fortnightly collection has resulted in plagues of rats and flies. However after so much effort there are not the facilities to actually recycle all the separated rubbish much of this either covertly dumped or exported to third world countries where it is cherry picked and the remainder dumped creating in yet more toxic sites in some cases next to high density areas of population.
Whilst I agree that on the face of it the new incinerator appears both too big and expensive it is clean and will generate power from our rubbish. We can still recycle in a responsible manner. At least our government are taking responsibility for the safe disposal of our waste and we are not left swimming in our own sewerage like many of our neighbours.
Report abuse
Harry – you are right about the carbon-neutral emissions element
Our claim is based solely on the basis that all of the fuel is processed to remove 95% of the plastic and other contaminants, thus ensuring cleaner chimney emissions in accordance with the Kyoto Protocolrequirement; than can ever be achieved by mass burn incineration
However,I have to agree -in the strictest sense of things, there is still a fossil fuel carbon element involved by way of the amount of petrol and diesel used to deliver waste to the plant.
This is something outside our control.
The plant will produce its own 95% carbon neutral power power – as it would hot water for commercial use – saving many hundreds of tons of fossil fuel based carbons to atmosphere – as will the production of thousands of tons of potable water from the vv seawater distillation plant – reducing the (French) energy required to pump water from the Queens reserviour.
For the records (pre OJEC) – on behalf of the Babcock Wilcox / Alfa-Laval Advanced Recycling Technologies Consortium – ART Managing Director, Tony Manser wrote a hard copy LETTER OF INTEREST addressed to the T&TS Director of Engineering clearly offering our services. This was rejected by the T&TS consulting engineers Babtie Fichtner on the premise that our holistic, resource recovery and automatic fuel manufacturing process with biomass CHP combustion was unsuitable, and that incineration was better for the Island of Jersey. This regretably, precluded us from the OJEC (Common Market) tendering process.Leaving us to submit an offer outside the BF influence. This we did, covered by drawings for a two line pre-sort plant and for the Volund biomass CHP plant – I think you will agree Harry this is a bit more than a submisson on the back of a fag packet.
Since when we have battled to get ourselves noticed and heard by the TTS Minister / the Resource and Finance Minister/ The Chief Minister / The Public Health Minister / The Environment Minister etc., and not least the valiant and ever helpful Chairman of the Environment Scrutiny Panel – and Chairlady of the what I believe to be Financial Probity Committee ( no response ).
Just for good measure – all being well, I shall submit our price now for a mass burn BW Volund incinerator – and believe me I’m pretty sure this will come out millions of £s less than for the Frenchie job – and with ART pre-sort and desalination will be a wholly superior – and just what Jersey needs to show the EU how it can be done to save millions of quid at this time of lack of international financial probity.
Report abuse
Aother point Harry
The “preferred bidder” Frenchie price is £93.35 MILLION for a basic mass-burn incinerator with only minimal pre-sort facility needed to remove metals and other non-burnable items.And being that the business is probably quoted for in Euro currency – you can bet your bottom dollar – with the £ sinking, as it has of late – the price will climb even higher (unless of course Mr La S. baught forward currency )
The balance £12.96 million is for “enabling works” for demolition of the Bellozanne plant etc.,
in all totalling over £106 million for a plant that should not cost a penny more than the Babcock Wilcox Volund / ART / Alfa Laval consortium £65.8 Million plant – plus a probably much lower ” enabling works” cost.
Another point of interest – The siting of the proposed incinerator or it’s alternative is alongside the JEC plant.
The JE Co have agreed to their chimney being used for the new plant emissions – and whilst we have taken this big cost saving into account – have the French !?
Report abuse
I reckon Jersey is being well and truly conned!! and this whole thing should be – in the interest of fiscal probity and Island environmental well-being – independently investigated – outside the influence of those responsible for recommending another potentially disasterous, over priced under performing incinerator.
Report abuse
A bridge would be a good idea providing our government could negotiate the appropriate deals with the Manche Government and solve a lot of problems associated with living on a small rock. For starters the ability for many to commute would free up our housing stock and the need rezone land. Utilities could be piped in as we already do with our electric. Easy transport would reduce import/export costs. Maybe we could negotiate the purchase of land and move our airport??.
Yes the cost would be enormous but with mutual benefit maybe we could reach a deal with the EU. Certainly if the proposed investor protection goes ahead maybe our strategic reserve would be safer tied up in concrete and steel rather than given away to the customers of a failed bank.
Report abuse