Late waste plant plan gains support
Saturday 19th September 2009, 2:29PM BST.
ANOTHER political effort might be launched to stop an energy-from-waste incinerator being built.
But Public Services has warned the move could delay a plant by five years.
Some deputies who voted against the department’s plan said they were now considering bringing a requete to the States to prevent the £93m. Suez Environnement waste plant.
This comes after an alternative solution was presented to islanders and deputies by a group led by local businessman Rodney Brouard and the Baltic Development Group, which said it would install and run it free, initially charging only an £80 per tonne gate fee.
Former Environment minister David De Lisle said he would be involved.
‘I will be talking to others to see if we can bring a requete, starting this coming week,’ said Deputy De Lisle.
‘I would, of course, sign a requete against the incinerator because of the threat to health, the humungous cost and the fact it will lock us into an old technology for 25 years.’
He said Mr Brouard’s proposal for a Vantage Waste Processor could be the answer.
‘They have a processor set up in Bournemouth that they can apparently load onto a lorry and bring here to show us – I would be interested.’
Deputy Dave Jones (pictured) , who led an unsuccessful sursis to delay the incinerator decision, said he would consider whether to sign a requete.
‘I would have to give it a lot of thought,’ he said, but after his own motion’s defeat he doubted it would be supported.
- You can view a PDF of Mr Brouard’s presentation on the Vantage solution by clicking this link.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
If this can be run by a private company,it can also give members of the public the possibility of buying shares in that company,which would then give it even more ability to move forward onto even more as yet, unknown spin offs, from such a technology.The States could then find some other way to waste the 93 millon over the next couple of years or so, in order to keep up their well known record of competence and clear thinking.
Report abuse
At last, some action is brewing to put a brake on this horendous mass incinerator.
Good luck in this avenue and I hope those that support will continue to do the necessary to make a change.
Report abuse
Seriously hope enough deputies sign up to the requete.
The wind has been from the North or there about for the last ten days, imagined the the spew of disease spores being seeded island wide if that chucking our rubbish into the sky Suez burner was operating.
Yea we float our s*** into the sea, not a good thing to do and sometimes on the tide it returns but hey if that monster gets built we’ll be everyday under threat.
Signing up a generation to pollution and paying for it through the nose seems akin to , well, mad.
Report abuse
On behalf of my client, the Devil, I would like to ask why we should put our trust in an untried technology run by people who are so ‘organised’ that despite having years to get a proposal together they could only put it to the public months after the States has already made a decision ….
Report abuse
Toby
It was expected that PSD would come back to the States with some alternative proposals. When they came back with only one option it became necessary for the general public to look for an alternative because our States had proved themselves incompetent to do so.
It shouldn’t have been necessary to look for alternatives so late in the day but in a short time alternatives have been been found that Burnie Flouquet was incapable of uncovering because he had already decided he wanted an incinerator whether the people wanted one or not.
Report abuse
A PDF of Mr Brouard’s presentation is now available – http://www.guernsey-press.com/pdf/bdb.pdf
Report abuse
Having read through the PDF put forward how can they(the staes) not have a serious look at these proposals.
This seems like the perfect solution with very little risk involved, and if it works as well as they claim will be much better than sues.
The biggest initial problem i can see is Flouquet trying to scare us into thinking we have to go with sues. He will be rubbishing this new idea along with his followers i fear.
Surely annbody in their right mind has to at least look into this further.
Come on Deputy Jones get them to see sense and take the fight to them :) i bet you`ll have most of the island with you.
Report abuse
bcb
Who the hell is annbody?
Report abuse
Its Mr Body’s wife
Report abuse
I would rather put everything I have in Rodder’s project, than put a brass farthing in “Basil” Flouquet’s daft project
Report abuse
Bcb
It is not that I don’t have the courage to take this back to the States, it is that the chance of success in overturning the decision on the Suez option is extremely slim. First of all in order to win any debate you need to take the majority of States members with you, my belief is that this new proposal is not advanced enough in terms of being tried and tested for me to guarantee to the States that it is the way forward and that the Suez option should be overturned. My opinion is that we should reduce the length of the contract with Suez to ten years and use those years to put in place an alternative if one is available to replace incineration as soon as possible. I also think we should not be paying for a massive building to house what are after all private businesses free of charge, these two contractors working with Suez stand to make considerable sums over the life of this plant at the expense of the Guernsey public in a vast building which has also been paid for by the Guernsey public. It does not seem to me to be a very good deal at all for the people of this Island. We still do not know the true costs of getting rid of the toxic bottom ash or whether the fly ash will be suitable to mix with local aggregates given our precarious water table.
Of course the other option is that Stan and his partners could set up their own waste disposal business, the black bag refuse of this island doesn’t belong to the States, it effectively belongs to the parish that collects it and the people who live in the parish who pay for it. So it is possible that the parish could send it to the waste disposal contractor with the lowest gate fee. I simply cannot at present find the support amongst States members for overturning the decision made in July, there is some support but not enough.
Report abuse
Won’t the States introduce some laws to prevent Suez being undercut? They’ll need high gate prices to make it worthwhile, and they’ll need all the junk they can get to meet their efficiency targets (written into SLA anyone?)
I have no doubt that this States will strangle the competition in order to justify its decision.
Meanwhile, back at the outfall pipe, lunch!
Report abuse
Re Dave Jones 23rd September 2009, 11.51am
First and foremost, thank you Mr Jones for having the testicular fortitude to address the concerns expressed on this forum. My considered opinion that it is of peripheral importance to accept the consenus of opinion which currently abodes with the majority of influential members of the States of Guernsey Government. I do understand that it is extremely difficult to disagree on a profound basis with some peoples opinion whom you have known for a generation; however, first and foremost I simply ask that before this Government makes the biggest horlicks of any tenure of elected representatives we put this to the litmus test of an Island wide democratic vote. Please do not be concerned about the whispers and mumbles which will indeed be expelled by the ministers within the Guernsey Government who are afraid or embarrassed to concede that they have been mistaken. It is sprodically littered throughout the passages of history with people who have been brave enough to stand upright and shout from the rooftops when something has been profoundly wrong, and those people were courageous enough to vocalise and state their position for the better good of the electorate and sacrifice cosy relationships in the process. I ask that you simply present this to a meeting of the States members that a democratic public vote be undertaken on this issue.
Report abuse
BONAPARTE
I am quite happy to ask fellow States members their view on a referendum on waste disposal, and I am fairly certain the majority of our population were they to be asked would vote against incineration, however that being said, then what? You have the answer you wanted but little time to start again from scratch. None of the alternatives that have been presented are robust enough in terms of being guaranteed workable technology to take the risk of ending up with a plant that doesn’t deliver the goods, all of them are extremely interesting concepts and although I don’t pretend to understand the chemistry or science of how many of these systems work they are very attractive nonetheless. I also agree with those who say that the States have made a huge mistake but that statement from is qualified by saying that it centers around the Suez contract that has far too many un-answered questions about the detail to make me feel comfortable. If we had the spare landfill capacity to take a punt on something else at the contractors expense then at the very least we would not be left with mountains of rotting waste to deal with if the new technology fails to deliver, the truth is we don’t and I can tell you nobody wanted an incinerator less than I did. The trouble with being in government is that you have to handle the situations for real and be responsible enough to recognize a democratic decision when one has been taken however apposed you were to that decision being made. If we could have got 20,000 or so out at the time of my Sursis then you might have persuaded more deputies to my way of thinking and re-examine what we are doing before signing anything, it didn’t happen we had a few thousand but not enough to make the majority of States members think again.
Report abuse
dave jones. i am sure you have the guts for the fight, it is a fight, and many people in history have been the underdog, and carried on to defeat the odds, do not give up, you were elected to defend the common man/woman, and this is the time to make a stand, but with the support of the people of guernsey. you all get your heads out of the sand.i was told the national anthem of guernsey is called, who cares about apathy
Report abuse
bella
I did make a stand in July and attempted to defeat the odds as you put it, and a fair number of the public came out in support of a partial rethink but I can’t do this on my own, it needs the other 46 States members to agree and I do not believe they will support the overturning of the July decision. It is not that I lack courage it is purely a numbers game in the end and unless the public come out in ridiculously large numbers and get on the doorsteps of all the Deputies to force a change of heart and a new debate then making a lone stand is a pointless exercise.
Report abuse
Is Dave Jones inciting civil unrest?
“…unless the public come out in ridiculously large numbers and get on the doorsteps of all the Deputies to force a change of heart…”
Allons y!
(I particularly like the word ‘get’ – an old esperanto word for ****)
Report abuse
I must say if this waste system works as stated then surely we must try this option before spending millions on the States backed proposal.
Have a look on Waste Managemnt World web site http://www.waste-management-world.com/display_article/359462/123/ARCHI/none/none/1/The-waste-to-energy-revolution/
Report abuse
James Murray, BusinessGreen, 30 Sep 2009
New 350MW plant fuels UK biomass energy boom
Environment Agency gives go ahead to Welsh wood chip-fuelled power plant capable of providing energy to 500,000 homes.
The UK’s burgeoning biomass industry received a further boost today with the news that plans for Britain’s largest wood-fired power station have been given the go ahead by the Environment Agency.
The 350MW Prenergy plant in Port Talbot, South Wales is expected to generate power for up to 500,000 homes while cutting emissions by between 50 and 80 per cent compared to gas or coal fired power stations.
The Environment Agency said that the permit would be dependent on Prenergy ensuring that the new facility has no measurable impact on local air quality and the wider environment.
It also requires Prenergy to deliver quantifiable carbon emission reductions by using only wood chips sourced from sustainably certified sources – the first time such a clause has been included for a biomass plant.
http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2250373/350mw-plant-fuels-uk-biomass
Report abuse