MINISTERS will face a barrage of hostile questions in the States tomorrow as concerns deepen over the cost, size and environmental impact of the proposed incinerator at La Collette.
The charge will be led by new Deputies Daniel Wimberley and Mike Higgins. They have today released a picture which they argue shows the size of the energy-from-waste plant and how it will affect the St Helier skyline.
‘The world is changing, people’s expectations are changing, ways of doing things are changing,’ said Deputy Wimberley. ‘We are fearful that the incinerator is over-sized, it is out of step with public opinion and it is a waste of public money.’
Deputy Higgins said: ‘It is more than likely that the plant will have a serious cost overrun. The failure to hedge the contract against adverse currency movements could easily cost the Island an additional £10 million. I want to know what financial advice was given, who gave it and whether it was followed.’
• A picture of the proposed energy-from-waste plant, released by backbenchers led by Deputies Daniel Wimberley and Mike Higgins showing, what they argue, is its true impact on the St Helier skyline
Article posted on 19th January, 2009 - 2.57pm
28 Article Comments
I appreciate the island needs a new waste disposal facility, but why has it been decided to place this monster of a building right out where it is so visually promenent. Surely there are other far less conspicuous locations on the island where it could be located. Any visitor arriving by ferry will beg the captain to turn right back around once they see the ugly mess that “waterfront II” is going to turn out to be.
Report abuse
It does look iconic lol
Report abuse
OK, Deputies Daniel Wimberley and Mike Higgins, have no need of an incinerator.
So what are Daniel and Mike to do with their rubbish? The answer to that question is a defining silence.
No NIMBYs in my back yard. Please.
Report abuse
Far too big, totally the wrong place, far too expensive. Too close to Connex and the fuel farm. Access road taking over part of Ramsar site.
Is there anything right about this incinerator?
Most importantly, do people want this at La Collette? Generally they don’t. Will the ministers reconsider their decision? Hardly likely.
Report abuse
i thoughgt this was a done deal. and we are having this whether we like it or not.
the old one is past its sell by date in more ways than one.
the amount of waste we produce is at times astounding.
with a bit of luck we will have the new one, just in time before the old one becomes totaly unusable. or do we want to be knee deep in festering houshold waste, old sofas, matresses.
plastics and alike.
the debate for this has gone on long enough.
do hope that some of or unemployed will get a chance to work on this project.
Report abuse
So if you dont want it at Collette where else could it go?
Bellozane?
Plemont?
Your Door Step?
I didnt think so.
Report abuse
more pollution for st.helier the local dumping ground why not put it where less people live in the country where most of the waste comes from.we have enough to put up with the traffic
Report abuse
did you know that the island will have to produce more waste to make the incinerator cost effective? i thought we were supposed to be reducing our waste and encouraging recycling! Confused!!
Report abuse
Let’s not rake over the coals again.
The decision has been made. Its not iconic, its not attractive, but just get on and build the thing now.
Otherwise, yet another delay and a few more million added to the bill.
Report abuse
Re Mark’s perspective
They do understand the need for waste disposal and will happily provide you with a variety of cheaper, more appropriate and more forward thinking alternatives. Try asking them (leave a message on their websites) or listening in to the States debate on the matter. Don’t take a few quotes in the JEP as the complete assessment of a politicians vision, they would not be questioning the decision without suggesting better alternatives.
Be thankful that somebody is willing to stand up against flawed money-wasting and irresponsible policies.
Report abuse
No No No stop producing so much waste. We can all cut down quite easily its in the wrong place where on earth would any other country put it on there shoreline it should be well out of sight or maybe the ones whom voted it to be there could have it on there doorstep se if they would like it it was passed without any proper thought or care for others
Report abuse
The Jersey Environment Forum produced a superb report about this whole issue years ago and recommended much more recycling, which was taken on board to be fair, but the other extremely sensible, well thought through findings have been largely overlooked. It is available on the States’ website – check it out.
Report abuse
In response to Mark G’s “So if you dont want it at Collette where else could it go?
Bellozane?
Plemont?
Your Door Step?
I didnt think so”
All I am saying is that the choice of location could hardly be more conspicuous. Havre Des Pas, once a charming tourist sea front area will become so hideous I’d pitty anyone ever trying to sell a property there. I’m no NIMBY. I live at the back of St Helier and would more happily have it near me (old quarry site behind Westmount) where it will be relatively out of sight. Better still, Ronez quarry is a vast eyesore – but guess what, you only ever see it if you are being particularly observant as you come into land on a flight from Guernsey. Could the incinerator not have been put there?
Report abuse
The incinertor idea is the easiest option for lazy people. I would have expected more from States Members.
Report abuse
Too Big, the capacity is actually less than the existing Incinerator. The building is large to house the advanced gas cleaning equipment which Bellozanne does not have. So it is probably too small, say in 15-20 years time when it starts breaking down, it wont be able to cope.
Too expensive, yes it is expensive, it would have been much cheaper perhaps 40million had the plans been signed say 4 years ago, in this time there has been a huge surge in demand for incinerators, the pound is much weaker, and after Guernsey pulled the plug on their plans, anybody tendering was obviously going to factor in a Channel Island fickle factor! So thanks to Duhammel and Co, thats cost us taxpayers GST for a year!
Alternative technologies, these are cheaper, but rely on exporting low grade recyclables, which there is not a market for, or dumping low grade compost on land which is not available in Jersey.
Site, yes the plant will be visual, but it is in an industrial area and a reasonable distance from residential housing. Far further than say Bellozanne. To try to say a modern plant is going to destroy the Ramsar site is just scare tactics. Perhaps if it is that important, we should look at the emissions from the JEC which has no gas cleaning, or even Bellozanne which at times will be blown over the Ramsar site.
People are suggesting Ronez as an alternative site. Couple of problems, the states dont own it, so what would that site cost 20million 40 million? Another problem is the chimney would need to be higher that the surrounding cliffs, so say a 600ft chimney may be required?
Report abuse
Waste separation is not recycling. As a small Island we have not got the infrastructure to recycle anything but compost and a few bits of wood and without the incinerator we will have to either export our rubbish or deal with it locally.
It seems there are few local options. Land fill it out as we don’t have the space so it would be back to open air burning at Grosnez, dumping it at sea and following the UK option of limiting each household to one bin every two weeks.
From watching the news I have doubts over the claims made by the States “greens” that the French or English governments will pay us to send our rubbish to them as it seems they can’t deal with their own waste. Perhaps then our rubbish will join that of the rest of the EU being exported at great cost to the third world and dumped in some giant unregulated toxic pit, probably in the centre of some huge scatter camp polluting air soil and water but at least it is out of “our” sight.
I would sleep a lot better with an underused facility such as the incinerator than any of these options.
I am concerned that our Government is reverting to the past whereby they are unable to stick to a decision and spend their time in endless rounds of reactive bickering rather than proactive and dynamic management. To discuss the scrapping the incinerator contract now will not only cost us taxpayers millions but will again divert States time and resources from discussing current and future issues.
Let’s look to the future and recycle where this is economic and environmentally viable and generate electricity from the rest. We should all remember that this is our rubbish so if we use less than we ultimately will dump lees.
Report abuse
Terry – the bellozanne incinerator should have been maintained throughout the years and repair work carried out routinely. It was deliberately left to crumble just like everything else on the island. Then some states member suggested Havre-des-pas without any thought whatsoever to the beauty of the shoreline never mind the health of islanders living nearby. The whole idea is a shambles.
Report abuse
in my mind the incinerator could not have been placed in a worse place. there are plenty of places it could have gone on the west side of the island, not in one of the most densly populated areas of the island!
i will be living right next to the incinerator if its built and to be quite honest the reasons its not elsewhere is because states members dont want it on their door steps.
and lets not forget the uk experts that came over and told us that the rates of cancer will be increased if its built
Report abuse
Ann – unfortunately you are probably right in what you say. It certainly would not be the first time a Civil Servant has pulled a fast one over our elected representatives in order to build or extend an empire. However we are all producing waste that need to be disposed of in the most environmentally friendly way possible which, given the huge cost of cancelling the present contract means moving forward. We must also ask our elected members take their heads out of the sand, stop this eternal reactive, bickering and provide a more forward thinking, proactive and dynamic government which given the problems we are presently face with we desperately need.
Report abuse
In Response to Ann,
Having recently visited the Bellozanne incinerator on the CIGPE (Channel Island Group of Professional Engineers) tours. I strongly disagree with your statement that the plant has not been maintained, over its life. The plant is 30 years old now, runs 24 hours per day 7 days per week, and almost 365 days per year. It is a credit to the staff who run the plant that we have not had more problems. Last year was the first year that deliveries to the incinerator were stopped to allow maintenance work to the bunker and cranes (which could not be done with the plant running). This was well planned over a bank holiday weekend, with maintenance staff working round the clock to allow the bunker to be reopened in a matter of days. Did you even notice any disruption to your rubbish collection, I didn’t?
If the plant had not been regularly maintained, it would not have lasted 20 years let alone 30. A plant of this type would typically have a design life of around 25 years, so already it is 5 years over this.
We were shown first hand the repairs carried out to the crane steelwork, which had failed due to fatigue. Not lack of routine maintenance. Fatigue is the result of flexing of metal over a number of years, and eventually causes metal to crack. The only way to properly repair these failures is to replace the cracked steelwork. I am sure this is not the only area which is starting to suffer fatigue, the difficulty is finding it before it fails.
Report abuse
I’m in agreement with Harry I personally spent 8 months working at Belozane replacing the louvers and flues. The staff there are very competent and have an in-house engineering team that are constantly battling to keep the plant open.
I think the new plant should be located in the same place as the old. Hidden away and not spoiling the already questionable view at Harve Des Pas
Report abuse
The destruction of part of the Ramsar site is going to be caused by building a new access road from La Collette around the coast to Green Street over part of it – nothing to do with emissions. Please look at the plans carefully.
The actual building is going to be about as tall as South Hill which you can see from Mark Forskitt’s picture and the other one available online against the backdrop of Mont Orgueil Castle – it is going to be absolutely enormous.
By the time everything is completed (landscaping, access road, moving fuel farm etc I don’t think we’ll see much – if any change from £200M – probably cost even more than this.
Report abuse
Nellie, If I am not mistaken the road you are talking about is not an access road for normal access, but purely for emergency access, so only has to be wide enough for say a fire engine or ambulance. The flip side of this is that there will be a decent tarmac road not used by traffic which would be available to all to push pushchairs, ride bikes or walk along and actually have a great view of the sea , without having to take their life in their hands negotiating the pavements and excessive traffic in Harve des Pas. as this road runs close to man made hills and landscaping around the new plant you wont actaully see most of the new plant from this road, so will actaully make it a lovely walk.
So many people are saying Harve des Pas, is such a lovely place, I’m sorry I disagree, there is nowhere to park so you cant stop there, most of the hotels are now appartments, appart from the swimming pool there are no decent facilities. The area often smells, dont blame the compost, it smelled way before that. The beach is OK, but go East to Green Island, or west to St Aubins, and you can enjoy huge areas of great beach which are far better than Harve des Pas. In reality appart from the visual impact of the new incinerator will this really change Harve Des Pas. I dont actually think you will see much of the new plant from Harve des Pas, the pictures are taken from further east, so even further away. OK it is an incinerator, If it was a sports centre, or cinema whould we be as worried by its visual impact?
At the end of the day as everybody produces waste, this is one of the few buildings on the island which is used by everybody, every day of the year. The alternatives are to build on reclaimed industrial land or greenbelt land, a lose lose situation. Bellozanne is too close to residential land, to count that as an option for the next 30 years.
In response to moving to Guernsey : Where do you put the new plant as the existing plant would have to keep running until the new plant was up and running. The Bellozanne site is narrow and the new plant is much larger than the existing one to house the gas cleaning equipment. so the traffic flow would be even worse than at the moment, which if you have used the site at the weekends at the moment is terrible. Then look at the fact that it is in a valley. How high would the chimney have to be to get above the valley? The existing houses would not suddenly move further away!
Report abuse
Response to Nellie Macon – you are right we might not see much of the 200million but I can assure you that will see, smell the stench and hear the contant disturbance due to heavy vehicles and the rest during the building and then the running of the incinerator itself. Will tts send out it’s workmen to clear up afterwards – I dont think so.
Report abuse
Response to Harry – hoteliers sold up to apartment developers only after they realised that their was a plan for an incinerator in the area. Havre-des-Pas is a shoreline area and in fact to have a seaview is a wanted commodity. Not everyone wants to live in St Brelades or St Ouen, they locals and tourists prefer to be close to the town yet have a seaview as well – best of both worlds!
Report abuse
Harry, this access road is not going to be open to the public – I know, sounds silly but apparently this is going to be the case. Likewise the landscaped area surrounding the incinerator as it is deemed too dangerous for public access albeit that the Connex building is within 25ft of one of the walls. The reasoning appears to be that so few people are in the Connex building during working hours that the danger is minimal….doesn’t make sense to me either.
Report abuse
The cost is 100 million euros…the exchange rates is 1.06…and yet they’ve been talking about this since the euro exchange rate was at 1.45!!!
Well done all these very intelligent people, in 3 months of arguing, it’s only going to cost you an extra 39 million euros if you buy it today!
Seriously…isn’t that 39 million euros of tax payers money that could have been used to help islanders through the worst recession since 1945???
Report abuse
A waste of money paid for in euros so £106M is not the price we will pay more like £130-140M with the crumbling exchange rate. Whoever decided to do this needs shooting in my opinion. This is overpriced, in the wrong place, a blot on the landscape, the wrong type of incinerator for our needs, likely to pollute a Ramsar site and the town, a disaster in the making as far as I am concerned. I have to ask are the States deliberately messing the island up?
Report abuse