Incinerator is dropped in ‘ship to Jersey’ plan
Wednesday 16th November 2011, 2:30PM GMT.
Public Services had to rethink its waste plans last year after a campaign against its proposed mass burner culminated in hundreds protesting on the steps of the States chamber. (0937420)
GUERNSEY’S waste will be exported, avoiding the need for an on-island incinerator, under proposals announced today.
Public Services was sent away early last year to rethink its waste plans after a campaign against its proposed mass burner culminated in hundreds protesting on the steps of the States chamber.
Its latest plan, which includes recycling 70% of the island’s waste by 2025, follows an extensive public consultation. Early indicative costs revealed to those taking part in the exercise showed export to be the most expensive option.
Although not confirmed at this stage, Jersey is likely to be the favoured destination given its proximity and spare capacity at its new incinerator near the coast at La Collette.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Saturday 26 May
- Laid-off staff see jobs re-advertised next day
- The Week - Roots Manuva interview
- Royal celebrations of yesteryear
- The Week - Jubilee Food
- Sport - Angus Mackay takes Gib job
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
Its obvious whats going on here,firstly i dont see hundreds of protestes? secondly the premier island will over charge or dump what remains in guernsey
RIP THE old guernsey
WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TODAY TO MAKE YOU FEEL PROUD
Report abuse
I don’t live in the island anymore but I have to ask….”who is this idiot and does anyone know what he wants to achieve?”
Report abuse
Good question but probably best to just ignore them.
Report abuse
And what will happen when Jersey reach full capacity and can not accept our waste any longer? If it’s going to end up being incinerated in the end anyway we should just build our own, at least we’d be independent. We would be saving some money and could generate energy from it for our island.
Report abuse
Excellent news
All they have to do now is draft in some specialist negotiators so that we don’t get ripped off again and it’s Bernie for Chief Minister
By the way peabrain there WERE hundreds of ‘protestes’ at the States Chamber on that day.Far too many to capture in that particular photo
Deputy (it wasn’t a fair vote)Spruce will no doubt recall that most of them were bent on lynching him
Report abuse
well, the anti incinerator lobby will be able to get more use out of their banners.
Unless it was only anti incinerators in their back yards ?
And where oh where is the comprehensive wste reduction and reuse strategy ?
Report abuse
The draft report has been circulated for comments from various interested parties. Expect something soon. But you’re right, incineration is incineration, wherever it takes place.
Report abuse
Jersey could make £12m a year from burning Guernsey’s rubbish
http://www.thisisjersey.com/news/2011/11/16/guernsey-proposes-sending-waste-here/
Good Luck
Report abuse
I just hope that all of those cheerfully waving their banners in the photo are taxpayers who will be happy to pay the additional cost resulting from their ill-informed campaign.
Report abuse
Ted
You can happily complain once we’ve run up a bill that is greater than 93.5M.
But wait, that 93.5M has to be made up not just of gate fees, but the difference in gate fees that Jersey’s initially mooted charge compared to Suez quoted gate fees less shipping costs, which at the time was a extremely negligable difference.
Oh hang on… that 93.5M also didnt include a decent service contract and an under utilised incinerator will need frequent stopping and wont burn to its full potential meaning its likley that it wont be as reliable as it should be, meaning everytime it failed, the taxpayer would pay. it was even mooted that our incinerators was to be so big, that we may have to find extra material to burn in it…..
What about legacy costs, the incinerators had a finite lifespan remember, the legacy costs werent considered either.
And thats not even touching on the fact that our quote from Suez was at least 40% higher than comparable units being built elsewhere, and the cost wasnt guaranteed to have been less than 93.5M anyway.
Yeah, the campaigners were bonkers not to want that!!
A comprehensive waste reduction strategy would mean that we would have very little waste to ship to Jersey meaning we could never even even run up the initial outlay, never mind all of the unforseen costs. But you probably cant be bothered with that can you? You would just rather stick it all in a bag and send it to be burned.
Report abuse
Dave H
Be that as it may well be but Bernie at least negotiated for the Suez thingy to come with a two year guarantee! :-)
Report abuse
Sounds like a good short term option but we need something here long term. Recycling must be pushed as much as possible. The waste that cannot be recycled must be dealt with in someway but preferably not an incinerator. When the Suez option was looked I believe there were a couple of other options which would have cost the island very little. Surely these options should at least be looked at in more detail even if they are new technologies. Maybe show the way to others for a change rather than follow.
Report abuse
The approach being taken with the glipses shown on the news look to be a promising step in the right direction.
Ulitmately with the cost of final waste disposal this will be a driver to help focus on pursuing waste minimisation. The less waste that enters the waste management chain the less it will cost.
Buying any item is not our last expenditure on it.
Report abuse
I wondered why they wanted this great big monster in jersey,silly me I should have known it was a money-making venture.
Pity us that live in ST.Helier the stink is wafted all over town and beyond.
It will be the first thing visitor see when sailing in the harbour!
This monstrosity cost more than a million,they could have got one half the price and more up to date and half the size.
Could this be the reason why they declined this better offer?
Report abuse
Probably just a typo but surely you mean it cost more than a HUNDRED million?
Report abuse
Yes Ray,your probably right,i never was any good at figures.
There was a huge outcry at the cost of it and where it was put.
They could have put it in one of the parishes where very few live near to the sea,so most of the smell would have wafted out into the sea,but hey why put it there where the rich live?
Report abuse
A couple of points. Firstly, this option rated very highly in the waste strategy “think tank”, although incineration was not deemed a desirable option anywhere this was partly ameliorated by the fact that Jersey’s incinerator would work more efficiently with the extra tonnage, cost, although not defined very well was also advantageous. I did hear today that the option of exporting to Europe or the UK was also being considered…..this was not an option seriously considered at the think tank!
Secondly, if this is now seriously on the table,it will require a place for transhipment…a quay, I hope logistics and cost of this have been factored into the “quay” that will be needed for transhipment of stone required for the airport development and also the tanker handling facility that will probably be needed in the not too distant future!
Cheers,
Report abuse
This is actually in contravention of international law, goes against the promixity principle a corner stone of international sustainability and I would be very interested to know if a full LCA has been undertaken to ensure that this does infact deliver a smaller carbon footprint than progressing with an on island solution, including the delivery of recyclates to material markets off the island, however it may work out to be the most pragmatic solution, such are the ambiguities and complexities of small island wastes management!!!
Simon Penney BSc MA MSc MCIWM CEnv
Director of Promise Consulting, International Waste Management Consultant
Chartered Wastes Manager, Chartered Environmentalist, Board Member of the BC and Yukon Chapter of the Solid Waste Association of North America, Online Member of the International Solid Waste Association……and a GUERNSEY MAN!
Report abuse
Oooooh.
Havent you done well for yourself?
Did you make a point? Sorry I was so mesmerised by your vulgar display of bragging that I must have missed it.
Report abuse
not all that sure what is vulgar about stating a couple of credentials that have been worked extremely hard for Steve-0! you seem to enjoy sittingin judgement of such hard work
Report abuse
Did you lose your sense of humour with all that study, it was a joke.
I just think that writing 5 lines worth of qualifications and memberships on an internet blog was quite amusing.
I have plenty of my own letters and memberships and I worked extremely hard for them so I wasnt judging your qualifications, I was merely judging you showing them off at the earliest oppurtunity.
Report abuse
Methinks Guernseyman Simon might be angling for a job in Guernsey?
With those credentials we could do a lot worse!
Report abuse
Thanks Simon- i’ve been banging on about this since the incinertor got chucked out the second time round- no one has been able to give me an answer …i was starting to wonder if i had it all wrong ( its been a while since my environmental law module!). How does Guernsey propose to justify this legally? It appears that we are flying in the face of what is accepted modern practice too- it seems like a really dirty solution.
Report abuse
Hi Simon,
Can you please clarify which international law you’re referring to, and how this option contravenes it?
Many people would consider this option to be in accordance with the proximity principle, as per its basic definition:
‘The proximity principle advocates that waste should be disposed of (or otherwise managed) close to the point at which it is generated, thus aiming to achieve responsible self-sufficiency at a regional/or sub regional level. Where this is not possible, priority should be given to transportation by rail or water.’
Jersey’s incinerator is a mere 30-odd miles away – a far closer proximity than the catchment areas of most incinerators, and this option also ticks the sub-regional level and transportation by water boxes.
Detailed LCA has indeed been done on all waste streams, including the delivery of recyclates to off-island destinations: you should be able to find the data on the gov.gg website. Hope this helps.
Report abuse
Simon:
Shipping to Jersey does not contravene the Proximity Principle. Defra have confirmed this. It is perfectly possible for the Channel Islands to be considered one entity and be completely in keeping with the Proximity Principle, which was originally constructed to stop waste, particularly hazardous waste, being shipped long distances to poorer communities for them to deal with. As Helen says, the proximity principle advocates that waste should be disposed of (or otherwise managed) close to the point at which it is generated, thus aiming to achieve responsible self-sufficiency at a regional level.
The proximity principle exists in European law (Waste Framework Directive) and states that waste should be disposed of in one of the nearest appropriate installations. This limits the environmental impact of transporting waste long distances – i.e. thousands of miles. In no way would shipping to Jersey contravene this principle. I wonder how much waste in the EU is dealt with within 30 miles of origin?
Over to you
Report abuse
Might Jersey charge us VAT on imported materials?
Report abuse
I was going to pop into Custard Castle today to pay a parking ticket (don’t get me started on parking wardens. Grrr!). However when I saw the press I thought I’d better leave it a day. I didn’t want to get caught in the throng of people who’ve been bombarding this forum with all the stuff about PSD rigging everything because they are so nuts about incinerators. I figures they’s be queuing up to say “we’re sorry, we were wrong. We’ve actually been misleading everyone”.
I might try tomorrow instead.
Report abuse
Until about a week or so ago the on-island incinerator was front-runner as far as PSD were concerned. I wonder what happened since then to change their minds? I am sure it had nothing to do with the increasing clamour against another incinerator…
…so of you go and hand over your £30
Report abuse
It was only 2 short weeks ago that PSD were saying that the front runner was on-island incineration. Over that time there has been a revaluation of the options and a change of heart. Fantastic! A day is a long time in politics…….. a fortnight is an age!
Report abuse
Guernsey used to have its own incinerator which worked very well until it was decided that dumping all waste into unused quarries was cheaper. Up to a point it (the incinerator) could and did pay for itself as much of the waste after sorting and burning had a commercial value Nowadays an addition to that would be a power source. The present day mutant Guernsey donkeys are going to have a shock when they pull their Ostrich heads out of the sand and realise the cost of shipping waste to somewhere else.
Bry
Report abuse
We have looked into the cost of shipping and it is not as expensive per tonne as Suez would have been, or anything like. But you are right….. every tonne we send will be a cost. What a fantastic incentive to reduce the amount of waste we produce!
We will all have to think before we bin.
Report abuse
Ruling out the incinerator is positive news but we still need to find the best and cost efficient solutions.
Report abuse
So how much is it going to cost us to buy a ship to ship it over there???
Report abuse
…and to build a suitable berth (and processing plant?) for the ship to dock at to pick up the waste???
Report abuse
markB – Those two ships the States bought a couple of years back. I know they were designed to carry oil but could one of them be modified? Does anyone know?
Report abuse
Either of the tankers could be modified. It’s simply a case of ballast. I would however say you would be better purchasing a tug and floating bin. That way the tug can leave the bin in Jersey and return with another whilst they unload the first. These purpose built ‘bins’ can then be lashed to go home two at a time. Timed to worked with the tides this could be quite cost effective. There you have it Paul…you’re biggest forum fan has had a prudent thought !
Report abuse
So our rubbish is to be shipped to Jersey, congratulations Scott Ogier with one fell swoop you have cleared out the States Of Deliberation.
G R Skuse
Report abuse
Well thats sorted then, and the wets have won no incinerator for guernsey except that they are happy to send it to someone who has one ,bit selfish that dont you think.as an aside and sure someone has mentioned it switzerland burns theirs and in singapore they use the fly ash to reclaim land to build luxury villas , that was good enough for me,so onward what do we need well, to save the collectors moving several tonnes of putrid gunge twice, a yard on the docks should do ,probably near the big cranes so it can be shovelled straight to the waiting boat ,oh yes we need a boat ,better make it two to allow for breakdowns,or bad weather, oh no bad weather the boats cant sail for three days ,ah well pile it higher.
This area will have to be bunded to stop the run off into the harbour off that horrible wet stinky stuff you find at the bottom of your bin in the summer but a whole lot more,whats next oh yeah gunge containment operatives x three one for mornings one for afternoons and one to cover for sickness in case one or two get infected with cholera or typhoid ,so better double that ,plus one expert brought in under licence to make sure the guerns are doing it right.
Whats next oh yeah three ratcatchers,one for mornings etc etc or a good cat so there we are ,got it covered no unexpected expenses or problems there ,should run as smooth as silk ,enjoy .
Report abuse
arapaho
You totally miss the point of this kind of strategy. There would be no stinky gungy rubbish as you describe it, if it is done properly. Anything of food origin will be removed at source and dealt with separately by IVC. Everything else will also be separated at source into the different recycling materials so that the amount of ‘residual’ waste to be exported will be greatly reduced. The fact that there will be a cost for what does need to be exported gives us exactly the incentive we need to drive down those tonnages. We will all have to play our part….. and why shouldn’t we be responsible for the waste we generate?
Report abuse
@ rosie
How is exporting our waste to Jersey (or France or the mainland) being responsible for the waste that we generate?
Who is going to separate the waste (at source?) and how is it going to be paid for? (not sure what IVC is). How do we ensure that everyone plays their part? It seems to me that we will need significant changes and equipment before we are in a position to progress even slightly and meanwhile the tip is getting higher and higher!
Report abuse
Karen:
Exporting our waste is not ideal, but is the lesser of two evils. All efforts will need to be made to radically reduce the amount of waste we generate in order to reduce the residual waste that requires treatment.
Trials have shown the most successful collection method of recyclates is if trained operators pick your bag of mixed dry recyclates off your doorstep and sort it into a compartmentalised lorry/truck. This would be a more expensive way of collecting but has shown to be less expensive in the long run because of the high capture rate of recyclates and the preserved quality of the materials,(no contamination) therefore obtaining best price in the marketplace.
IVC= In Vessel Composter. Would turn food waste into compost.
How do we ensure that everyone plays there part? Education, education, education. Make it as easy as poss for everyone to recycle. Charge for the amount of residual waste everyone produces…. to start with.
Report abuse
Wasn’t containerisation mentioned at some point?
If practical it could all be shoved into nice clean (on the outside) containers at Chouet and shipped out by the same firms who will be losing out on the fulfilment cargo income
Report abuse
Waste managament is not about collecting your stinky wet dripping black bin sack and lobbing it in an incinerator but sorting waste into the rightful waste steams.
Waste that is incinerated is inert none reuseable, none recycleable and none digestable. So the problems mentioned will not exist when waste is handled resposibily.
In this day and age and with global pressures to do the right thing there should be no black bin sack lobbing on a fire.
Report abuse
Wow Guadeloupe, you are well-informed.
That or you are wrong, and simply trying to justify previous ill-conceived comments. i.e. they’ve not done what you so fervently predicted, and therefore it must have been a late change of heart all down to your hard work.
I can’t decide which it is?
(Actually that last bit was a polite lie.)
Report abuse
Congratulations PSD…… I now hope that you can convince the incinerator die-hards to get behind a new strategy based on minimising the amount of waste that needs to be exported. This will be a new direction for Guernsey. One that demonstrates our willingness to accept our responsibility to reduce the impact of our consumer based society and in the process become a more sustainable island.
Report abuse
Yes, I agree, Rosie – I don’t often pat PSD on the back but I think they’ve backed the right horse this time. It’s easy to lose sight of the bigger picture when talking about ‘waste solutions’ and think that disposal is the be all and end all, but in fact the most important thing about this new stategy is that it gets its priorities straight, with most of the emphasis on preventing and reducing waste in the first place. Can’t argue with that! Exporting an ever-decreasing amount of residual waste is the best available option, certainly in the short- to medium-term while the waste prevention measures are implemented and take effect.
Report abuse
AH, here’s another one – Rosie. According to Guadeloupe it was a week ago that PSD was still hell bent on an incinerator, Now you say it was two weeks. Can someone please tell us precisely what date, time, and where this Damascene transformation took place?
An alternative view is that it didn’t, and like so much else that has been posted on this forum it is simply hot air (ironic for an incineration thread).
And on this note of ‘incinerator diehards’. Is there such a beast? I know there are anti-incinerator die-hards, that much is evident. But I think the flip side of that is probably more accurately incinerator indifferents.
Report abuse
Simon Penney – your long sign off block says it all. You’re not a lawyer, so it’s just a layman’s opinion.
I say well done the States, our rubbish can’t go to a nicer place. Well, maybe land reclamation would be better, but Jersey is fine.
Report abuse
Hi Helen, I hope you are well,
I really should keep my mouth shut, it always gets me into trouble.
As I said in my response it is likely that this is probably the best interim solution, i.e. for a period of 5 years or so. All waste policy should be revised at this frequency just to keep up with technology etc.
In terms of law, it may well be possible to squeeze this in under a bilateral agreement, however of course any waste shipped across a boundary (which is the issue) for disposal is a notifiable waste under TFS legislation, and if this were just about any other place in Europe, it would VERY LIKELY be illegal to ship MSW for disposal (Y46 is I believe the catagoriesation). Guernsey is a signature to the Basel convention and I am wondering if we could maintain that status if we are so openly flauting another widely recognised standard. However as I said it might be possible to do this in the short term.
Definitions are always the issue of contention when it comes to law and definitions, the spirit of the proximity principle is I would suggest broken by sending it to Jersey, the spirit of the principle is that a community that generates the waste should dispose of it on their patch.
As for LCA and carbon footprinting, It is good to see that LCA has been done for emissions, has footprinting also been done to ensure that sending this material to Jersey will in fact reduce the carbon emission
Anyway look forward to any further comments, Simon
Report abuse
Hi Simon,
I completely agree that we should review our options at regular intervals (five years sounds sensible) so we can make sure we’re using the most appropriate set of solutions available. (One of the things I liked least about the Suez proposal was the inflexibility of the 25-year contract.)
Where I disagree is that the spirit of the proximity principle would be broken by sending our residual waste to Jersey. We might have discrete jurisdictions and get very competitive over muratis etc, but to outsiders the Channel Islands are often viewed as a single entity and in my opinion we can only benefit from greater co-operation. (Perhaps this multi-island co-operation could extend to recycling resources as well? Just a thought.) The way I see it we’d be cutting off our nose to spite our face in environmental terms if we were to have two large incinerators within 30 miles of each other: surely one incinerator running more efficiently is better than two running less efficiently? Another compelling argument re: the reduction of carbon emissions (although I’m not aware of the official projections of this option compared with others) would surely be the fact that, as Rosie has pointed out, as long as we have to pay per tonne of waste we create we have a good incentive to continue reducing it, whereas if we had an incinerator on-island we’d lose that direct incentive and would be far less likely to significantly drive down our waste volumes. In a nutshell, my interpretation of the principle is that a pan-Channel Island approach is more responsible than a strictly insular solution. Jersey would benefit from increased energy from waste efficiency rates and an additional revenue stream, so I don’t think this option is exploitative (which I think is one of the problems the principle is designed to protect against).
Thanks for the info re: the legal aspects of the situation: I’m sure the relevant people in PSD are looking into this and will find a way through the red tape. Personally I’d hope that the Channel Islands would be considered for this purpose a single entity, equivalent to a single UK county, for example, which most people would probably think sounds reasonable.
As you rightly point out, we’d be wise in any case to treat this option as an interim solution. Hopefully in five years’ time we can reassess the situation in light of our substantially reduced residual waste tonnages…
Report abuse
Thanks Helen, I do agree with a pan channel island approach, although I would point out that thermal treatment does not equal large incinerators, in 5 years time it will be more than possible I would think to have a small thermal treatment facility that is tested and tried technology, which will provide an on island solution. I dont know how much it is anticipated to cost to send to Jersey, but it wont take many years to get to the 100 million, if 12 million is realistic (I think it would be less than this), but even 5 million a year will give you 20 years and no solution at the end. If the system can be intergrated not just via solution but in planning and implementation then there is hope……in that the two island systems need to be fully integrated for a long term waste strategy to work. Recycling of 70% is a min amount of most waste strategies, with many municple areas no aiming for around 80% by 2025. There of course needs to be much more focus on waste prevention, and supply chain management. Anyway I would be delighted to speak more with you on any of these subject, please feel free to ask the GSY press for my email if you would like to continue the conversation, (GSY PRESS) please pass on my email if asked for, thanks!
Report abuse
Simon,
The quoted figure of £10 to £12m was for the entire waste strategy – to include IVC, kerbside, repair and re-use centre etc. PSD are not telling what the ‘ship to Jersey’ portion of that is – but a guess of £3m to £4m a year (including amortisation of baling plant etc) would probably be a reasonable estimate.
And as you rightly point out waste volumes should decrease over time, for many reasons, meaning the cost will fall in real terms.
To equate, as you do, a variable cost over a period of years to the upfront capital cost of an incinerator or similar (£100m) is completely and utterly meaningless. I think the figures you use are flawed, but even if they were not, you have not allowed for all the other costs of having an on-island plant such as operating costs, maintenance costs and long term finance costs in your comparison.
You also fall into the trap of the desire to have “big-box technology”, which is looking at the problem down the wrong end of the telescope.
Report abuse
Hi..just wanted to say that my focus would be on waste prevention, but as I am not the consultant for the states of Guernsey that is just my say so….I have been simply been commenting on the end part of the strategy because that is the topic of conversation, having spent 20 years developing waste strategies around the world, I have plenty to say about the rest of it. And as I have said please get in touch with me privately….and I will be happy to discuss further…..this is me signing off!
Report abuse
Simon,
I’m sorry that you are signing off from the public debate and only prepared now to have a private one.
It is to be hoped that the States policy is now truly based on waste prevention too, to the extent that it renders the end technology ultimately redundant.
There were many people pushing for a zero waste strategy, but as I have said the conservative elements got rather twitchy about this as perhaps it sounded (a) new agey, and (b) impossible.
However in the time it has taken to think up 3 waste strategies, it has become much more mainstream.
So we can give it a different name – call it ‘following the waste hierarchy’ maybe – not as catchy a title but it essentially adds up to the same thing. It also means that the money needs to be used at the front end rather than the back end.
So from my point of view, it does not really matter too much what whizzy technology might be available in 5 years (why is technology always 5 years away, apart from nuclear fusion which has always been 20 years away?) I digress. The point is that we should be approaching waste in a way that we don’t need the magic box to supposedly make waste disappear (or at least turn it into something we can’t see!)
Report abuse
Hi Simon,
Delighted to see that you would also advocate a strategy that focuses on the ‘Prevention’ end of the hierarchy…… that is exactly what we have been trying to push for the last goodness knows how long. Export of our residual waste is not ideal but one big plus for it is the incentive it will give us to prevent and reduce all our waste, because the more we make the more costly it will be to export it.
You comment that 70% recycling should be a minimum target. I agree. Guernsey is looking at a 70% target by 2025 which is not nearly enough. If they are going to succeed with this strategy then we need to be much more ambitious with what needs to be achieved. Unfortunately, there are quite a few Deputies here that still believe Prevention, Reduction, Recycling etc etc should all be voluntary activities for those that can be bothered, which really is why we are still where we are and not further down the path to greater diversion. I think it’s crucial this outdated attitude is changed.
Having said that, I don’t think that legislation has to necessarily be brought in to make people recycle. The system just needs to be set up so that recycling is the easiest way of getting rid of your waste and you pay for however much residual waste you make.
Report abuse
Yes – congratulations to PSD.A waste treatment process based on source separation, high recycling and residual waste minimisation is the right strategy for Guernsey. Without the enormous up-front cost of an inflexible mass-burn incinerator, this will lead to a far lower overall cost than the alternatives ,as we will all have an incentive to reduce residual waste, and thus costs. Kerbside recycling must play an important part in this.
Report abuse
Actually Dave, as it seems so important to you for reasons that escape me, I think a few changed 11 days ago, one last week and two are still diehards. Hope this helps.
What would have been your preferred solution?
Report abuse
I am hugely in favour of increasing recycling but quite frankly I am getting absolutely fed up with the facilities we have to do so!! I go fortnightly with my little car loaded up to the brim to the Chouet headland. I struggle to reach the paper bin and as I have loads of shredding (run a business from home) most of this gets blown into the sea as I try to negotiate emptying and pushing into the container whilst balancing on tiptoes and using one hand to wedge open the flap – which usually ends up bashing my wrist/hand/arm at least 5 or 6 times. Then I end up running round the potholed car park there trying to pick up mine, and everyone elses, stuff which is blowing round. I will ALWAYS inevitably end up bringing a load back home because the bins are full. Not to mention looking like I have been pushed and pulled through a bush backwards as it is ALWAYS windy in that location. I will not go elsewhere as that is the closest to me. I will continue but I am sure I am not the only person who is getting fed up of the facilities we have to use, especially when you look at what other countries can offer. Instead of continuing to waste money on huge projects which always go over budget I wish the States would sort out some of the little things over here — kerbside recycling and a proper bus service. I truly am beginning to think I might as well put out more sacks of rubbish for the binmen to pick up- just like half the people in my road do each week. Where is the incentive to people to recycle anyway??? As an island I believe we are completely backward in encouraging people to recycle. I spent some time in Southampton a few years ago and they had kerbside recycling there already.
Report abuse
Try the Vale Douzaine to cut down on your Chouet visits.Nice even tarmac with paper and milk carton bins (possibly tins too?)
Report abuse
Have you tried putting the shredding in a paper bag, so it can all go in the container together? Or just put it in a compost bin at home along with food waste and garden waste – shredded paper is excellent at stopping your compost get too wet or smelly.
But I agree that kerbside recycling would be a massive improvement over the current situation.
The other day I happened to look into the container when recycling and saw that some muppet had put cardboard and drinks cartons in with the paper. What sort of person goes to the trouble of keeping their recycling, then going to the recycling centre, but then puts things in the wrong bins?? With that sort of mentality around, we would be better off with kerbside pick up of mixed recylcing which is then sorted after collection.
Report abuse
Thanks Ray and Terry for suggestions. Not sure if Vale Douzaine has plastic and tins and when I go for my fortnightly ‘saga’ I only want to go to one place! I do use big paper bags when I have them – this is a great idea but I do have alot of shredding – sometimes 2 black sacks full – but I shall work on this!! It does beggar belief that people bother to recylce then put things in the wrong containers?? I have seen this too – seems like these people have their priorities right but fail at the last hurdle and yes, kerbside recycling then sorting would attend to this. I just get so exasperated with the States – they have been trying to get us all to recycle for years now but dont exactly make it very easy for us do they!! Possibly this thread has gone off the beaten track a little as its supposed to be about incineration but surely it all begins with reducing our rubbish, elimination of ridiculous supermarket packaging and plastic bags and finally recycling…
Report abuse
My council say no to shredded paper in the paper recycling as it is difficult to reclaim at the auto sorting plant and mucks up and makes dirty other recyling objects.
It might be that putting it in a paper bag is the way to go that was suggested above.
Report abuse
Hang in there ‘gettingfedup….’ Hopefully, not too long now until recycling is made easier for you. It really is amazing that we do so well with our recycling when for some people, it really is such a chore! A real testament to the Guernsey spirit!
If you are down in the Vale, I know that at least one of your Deputies (who is even on the WDA), doesn’t want kerbside recycling so maybe you could write to them all expressing your feelings.
Report abuse
gettingfedup….
I have spoken with the chap who runs ‘Archivist’ about your shredded office paper. He says that you can drop it into their offices off the Braye Rd, (round the corner from Alliance and just next door to where the Press is) provided it is shredded and is CLEAN, i.e. no contamination, plastics or anything else in it. He doesn’t want big businesses turning up with loads of stuff, but someone like you, working from home with just a couple of black sacks of clean shredded office paper is fine. I am sure that you must occasionally find yourself driving down the Braye Road, and if when you do, you combined it with delivering your shredded paper to Archivist, this might help solve your problem.
I just must stress, that the paper must be just paper. Staples are all right, but no other contamination.
Report abuse
Thankyou for taking the time to research this for me Rosie – I will definitely be doing this in future – I was unaware and probably many others are too. As you say, its just for the ‘smaller’ businesses to take advantage of. Although it may appear that I am getting apathetic about recycling and ‘getting fed up’ I will continue to do so as long as I am able to physically do so and drive my car to the ‘depot’! The problem is that as long as people like us do all we possibly can to reuse/recycle etc there are just as many people out there not bothered about it – these are the people that need to be mollycoddled to do so and that is why money needs to be spent by our government in providing kerbside collections to at least get a larger proportion of the population doing so.
Report abuse
I wonder what Ray and Paul Le Page think ?
They are experts on talking rubbish
WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TODAY TO MAKE YOU FEEL PROUD
Report abuse
I would’ve told you what I think PB old pal but I was too busy down at Waitrose talking into the recycling bin. Even rubbish words can be recycled these days you know….amazing!
Report abuse
Rosie – “How do we ensure that everyone plays there part? Education, education, education. Make it as easy as poss for everyone to recycle.”
Quite correct. Education is required and it needs to be made as easy as possible to encourage recycling. Keep put costs on things will not help as people don’t like paying has to be driven from government level.
Report abuse
Geoff,
We have a fantastic recycling officer who works really hard. But there is only one of her……. She could do with a whole team of people to help her to deliver the education and assistance as new systems are brought in. I hope that PSD agree that that is where funds will need to be spent because if that job is done well and effectively, I think that we would see big reductions in the amount of residual waste that is generated.
Report abuse
Good result for those that opposed the incinerator and well done PSD for consulting and actually listening. For a moment there………
Report abuse
The idea of sending it all to jersey is not new
I was interviewed by channel TV in the run up to the 2004 election.When asked what I thought about the rubbish issue I said send it to Jersey then.
Report abuse
The Vale douzaine have plastic, milk carton,paper, clothing and video cd,book bins.
Bordeaux carpark has, glass, paper and tins, so there is other sites to the Vale instead of going to windy old Chouet.
I just hope PSD have checked with Jersey they still want our rubbish, it was quite a while ago they said they would take it,if they still say yes, get a contract signed pretty quick before they change their minds, and what would happen then, we would be back to square 1.
Report abuse
Strange to see Jersey’s racist Bella commenting on this site. She gets a lot of stick, quite rightly, for her antedeluvian and bigoted views.
Report abuse
So the island still relies on vehicle drivers to recycle?
As more elderly give up driving, the roadside collection rate will increase!
Report abuse
All of the anti incinerator brigade should hang their heads in shame. You used to shout about how ‘un-green’ it would be to burn our waste and it should be the last option, but suddenly because it’s not going to happen in your island it’s all OK.
We should have built our own incinerator the first time round (for half the currently quoted cost) and it would be running quite happily here and now. Thanks to Dep. Scott Brehaut for bringing the raquette to the states for stopping it first time round we now find ourselves in this position.
As mentioned early on in these posts. When (and I mean when) Jersey decide they can no longer manage our waste as well as their own we will start all over again with and even more expensive incinerator. All the dithering and lack of backbone by the states has cost us very dearly so far and it looks like it will cost a lot more in the future.
Report abuse
Ian 3
Stop talking about the Shadow in this way
Btw
Good to see you are part of the exodus,maybe you could be classed as pre gone exodus or pre come
Report abuse
Donkey Doo
I would think that the original Lurgi incinerator would be worn out or certainly on its last legs by now (remember that Suez only had a two year guarantee on it!)
If the International law on transporting rubbish between jurisdictions doesn’t cater for two fly speck on a world map islands within sight of each other then the law,once again is an ass
Report abuse
Donkey Doo.
When someone like you makes sweeping statements without making any effort to find out what you are talking about first, it sure is very frustrating!!
If we had built ‘our own incinerator first time round’ as you suggest, we would now be the proud owners of a 70,000tonne plant, capable of burning twice the amount of waste that we are now generating. How dumb would that be? Incase you haven’t noticed, residual waste has been trending down in Guernsey for the last 10 years and could go considerably further down if we focused more determinedly at the front end of the waste stream. We have hardly scratched the surface with what we can do.
Incase you also hadn’t noticed, Jersey has an under-utelised plant capable of burning 40% more waste than they are producing. If we (temporarily) take up part of that excess space, we will give Jersey an incentive to reduce their residual tonnages too. So- between the 2 islands, less waste overall will need to be burnt.
The ‘anti-incinerator brigade’ ( as you term them) had a variety of reasons to be anti Suez, and not all of them shared all of the concerns….some were only anti certain elements:
For many it was the large capital out-lay.
For some it was the in-flexibilty of being locked into burning for a minimum of 25 yrs.
For some it was having a waste system that encouraged waste creation.
For some it was the size of the plant at the gateway to Guernsey.
For some it was the burning/destroying of resources.
For some it was health reasons.
For some it was the increase of CO2 it would cause.
Burning in Jersey is not ideal. But it is far better than building our own incinerator here, and crucially, it gives us a HUGE incentive to reduce the amount of residual waste that we generate so that we can continually reduce the negative impact that our percentage of the waste will be having. If you go through the list of reasons people were anti Suez that I have given above, you will see that over half of them will no longer be a problem if we export to Jersey. It is only the last 3 reasons that still remain a concern, but because our incentive will now be to REDUCE our contribution to the problem, these concerns will be additional arguments that we can use to drive down our waste creation. The idea that residual waste tonnages HAVE to go on increasing is sooooooo last century!
I just hope that PSD will have the cojones to tackle waste reduction with the determination and resolve it will need. And we must all be prepared to play our part which will mean no more just chucking things into the bin without thinking about it. We’re all going to have to wise-up.
Report abuse
Donkey Doo
I think you will find it was Scott Ogier, not “Scott Brehaut” who brought the requete in 2004. And thank god he did. Otherwise we would be saddled with a 70,000 tonne incinerator when it has been calculated that with correct diversion of food waste (which should not be burnt for efficiency reasons) and kerbside recycling, at most we would need a 25,000 tonne plant. Seven short years after certain people thought 70,000 tonnes was the business.
I understand there are also one or two States members who still think we should have gone along with the Lurgi proposal – unbelievable!
So please make an effort to get your facts straight before posting – unless of course your user name is some kind of witty pun about your content and I am missing the irony.
Report abuse
Simon,
I have just re-read the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous
Wastes and Their Disposal. I wonder if you could point me to the section which you believe will be problematic in terms of shipping waste to Jersey?
It is important to note that the convention does not prohibit moving waste from one State to another; rather it seeks to regulate it, with good reason. For example the receiving State has to agree to take the waste and has to have a suitable facility for dealing with it.
Furthermore, and perhaps crucially, the regulation does not apply to wastes transported for the purposes of recovery operations (as opposed to disposal operations). I believe that Jersey’s incinerator achieves R1 criteria for recovery operations.
Report abuse
Hi Guadelope, this is a very complicated area, basically the problem is that the waste is being shipped across a boundary for disposal (incineration is considered a disposal option, even though heat or energy may be recovered). This means that any waste shipped ACROSS A BOUNDARY (and guernsey to jersey does consitute a boundary on this case) is considered to be a notifiable waste, under TFS legislation. This means it must be passed by the regulating authority in both jurisdictions for it to be allowed. Also as household waste, there is probably no other area in europe that would allow this shipment to take place. It may be possible to do it as a bilateral agreement between jersey and guernsey, but the law is not straight forward at all. The Basel convention is inacted in Guernsey law under the TFS regs, and I would need to re read those to be able to give you a more comprehensive response, again as with helen, I would be more than happy to discuss this futher privately, please ask for my email address and I ask GSY press to give you it, if you ask, thanks, Simon
Report abuse
Simon
Yes I know what a BOUNDARY is. However perhaps you could explain why the Convention differentiates between recovery and disposal, if as you say it is not relevant.
Report abuse
Hi,
AS I said very happy to continue discussion, please ask GSY press for email, as they wont allow me to publish mine. Thanks.
Report abuse
Thanks for the offer of your email address, but continuing the discussion here allows others to read it and get involved if they wish, so I don’t see the need for it to be discussed ‘privately’.
Report abuse
Hi, I am more than happy to have the dicussion publically, but I am getting alittle lost now with the length of this thread! lol! let me know if there is another forum and we can take it from there.
Simon
Report abuse
Donkey Doo
Have you read and hopefully re read the replies to your post?. Are you still holding your head high while the rest of us hang ours in shame :).
Report abuse
can we not just put an incenerator on Alderney & send all of our rubbish up there to burn?
Report abuse
Have any of you been to Mont Cuet tip over the last few months? I have and was surprised to how how rapidly it has filled since the last time I was there which would only have been about 5 months. Looking at how fast its filling it will be lucky to have another 2 or or 3 years. Then if we are to ship to Jersey when it is full, what happens upon bad weather or oil shortage for the tug to take it tthere? Has anyone thout of putting the unemployed and prisoners next to a conveyor belt emptying the rubbish and pulling out recyclables? This would reduce the amount to actually dispose of by a massive margin. I think a recycling facility should be thought of as well as an eventual incinerator. If you go to Mont Cuet tip and look at the amount of stuff that could have been recycled that is filling that void, its disgusting really and quite lazy of both us the people who are filling our bins with it and the States for not thinking up such a simple solution as to use those that our taxes keep, i.e. Unemployed and prisoners to seperate it. Oh and just as an unrelated thought, when you tip asbestos, the tip workers just dig a hole and bury it, after you have double bagged it. Now they are drilling bore holes to extract waste gasses right through the stuff and releasing those fibres in to the atmosphere!
Report abuse
Rubbish,
Fortunately, there are more mathematical ways of calculating the remaining life of the tip than just eyeballing it. However, I do agree with you that it is depressing to see how much material goes in that could be recycled or reused.
If we stop such material going in, the tip could easily last us way past the middle of the century.
While it may seem a pat solution to get the ‘unemployed and prisoners’ to sort out everyone else’s rubbish, I really think that people should take responsibility for what they create. Furthermore there is ample evidence to show that if waste is kept separate by the householder then the resulting recyclable materials attract a much higher price and there is less spoilage of recyclables meaning they don’t have to be landfilled.
A better idea for the ‘unemployed and prisoners’ would be apprenticeships or work at an undercover repair and reuse centre.
I agree wholeheartedly that the States need to make it easy and attractive for people to do the right thing and then there is no excuse for those who don’t
Report abuse
Here is a very basic way of putting how quickly the tip will fill. Each year our population goes up, each person eats and uses and disposes of packaging and consumables. The population is always increasing and so is the waste. The tip has raised its level about 20 metres in the last 2 or 3 years and there is only about tgat much height left with increased waste going in.
Heres another side thought. When you next go in to a supermarket, go to the toiletries or cleaning product aisles and look at all the different bleaches, soaps and disinfectants and imagine all of that being poured directly in to the sea. That is what happens every day, that all gets flushed down the drain and pumped out to sea. No one moans about that. A few turds maybe but not the tons of poisons.
Report abuse
Rubbish,
The amount of waste going into the tip is not growing. Over the last 10 years the tonnages have dropped dramatically although we do now seem to have hit a bit of a plateau. And we have hit the plateau because we are relying on people to reduce their residual waste voluntarily. Most civic minded people are now doing what they can by taking their recyclates to the Bring Banks, but that still leaves hoards of people who don’t give a monkeys. This States HAS to get a grip on how to pull those people on board into reducing their waste. We’ve pussyfooted around long enough not wanting to offend anyone’s sensibilities, but now we just need someone with the b***ls to radically change the way we collect recyclates and residual waste so that no-one is sending anything to the tip that doesn’t need to go there.
Like you Rubbish, I find it sooooo frustrating that the tip is receiving anything that could be recycled…… it’s completely barking when at the same time, we are being told that the rate of fill is critical. Can the States just hurry up and introduce island-wide kerbside sorted recyclate collections that EVERYBODY has to comply with.
Totally agree with your point re household cleaning chemicals. I have often made exactly that point myself.
Report abuse
Rubbish,
The population of Guernsey is rising extremely slowly as a percentage. Waste going into Mont Cuet is falling year-on-year, quite dramatically. Without digging out the figures, I believe it has fallen from 70,000 tonnes a year to 35,000 tonnes a year in the last 10 years.
IIRC, the remaining space is sufficient for around 400,000 tonnes. It should be possible to drop our waste to 25,000 almost straight away by the introduction of kerbside and In-Vessel composting. So even if we go no further that means it will have another 16 years. However we can go much, much further than that and by using Jersey as an interim while we really get our waste minimisation into gear, we can ensure it will last a very long time indeed.
Report abuse