Ringaskiddy Incinerator Oral Hearing Report

by Baywatch Sat Jun 11, 2011 21:17

As its second Senior Inspector said this should be refused, the Board finally gets the message. Planning for slow learners.

Well done Chase.

by maire - CHASE Wed Jul 29, 2009 22:11

Annemarie,

A pity you could not have supported Indaver at the oral hearing, as they were the only group supporting this private development
which will put in jeopardy the 500 jobs which could be created at the Maritime College. Chase were one of many groups opposing this private development. In all the groups represented 2000 objections.
Incineration is not the Best Available Technology at this stage and can not offer sustainable waste management.

Please read up on evidence given at the oral hearing on www.chaseireland.org.

by Pete. Tue Jul 28, 2009 15:58

If we do what the Danes do we can use incinerators to DECREASE pollution.

In Copenhagen they use the waste heat from local incinerators to heat thousands of homes thereby greatly reducing pollution.

97% of Copenhagen's heating comes from waste heat from Electricity generators many of which are themselves waste incinerators.

Described here:

http://www.c40cities.org/bestpractices/energy/copenhage...t.jsp

They did it without the hysteria which seems to accompany ANY form of proposed industrial development here in Ireland.
.
Irish Mantra: "We are all Dead if this goes Ahead".
.

by annemarie Tue Jul 28, 2009 13:20

John,
I am a geography teacher and i was wondering if i could use your views on this topic in my lesson plan. we will be studying ringaskiddy incinerator as part of the title 'a conflict of interest between industrialists and a local community.' I think your views would add to the lesson.
In my own personal view, I think the incinerator should go ahead. The plant would atrract more industry to the area and create more jobs, especially in the construction industry. Furthermore, 60 more jobs would be created directly. Do you not agree that this would be excellent in our current economic climate? 62% of Ireland's toxic waste is produced in Cork and this would be the most economical way of disposing of it also. Energy from the incinerators could be harnessed to create electricity for the local area. Wouldnt this also be a great advantage to the people of Ringaskiddy. I see you said that a group apposing the matter spent over 200000e on its campaign. I find that rediculous spending so much money on a campaign that will more than likely not hinder an bord pleanála's decision.
I do realise the arguments against the plant by the local community and I accept them as being very good arguments but i do believe that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. Look what landfills are doing to the environment! We have to put our waste somewhere and an incinerator is the most economical. I suppose it is fine for me to argue when I dont live in RIngaskiddy. I am from Wexford.
Anyway, I am rambling on.
I hope to be able to use your views in my lesson plan.
Thank you for reading this,
Anne Marie

by maire Mon Jun 15, 2009 21:08

Shoe girl and Blond,

Indaver want a commercial toxic and municipal co-incinerator. The one that you toss everything in and hope that nothing reacts with each other to cause any problems.

Incinerators in the pharmaceutical companies are single stream in house burners, so they know what they are burning.

Yes, we don't know how they affect our health, but setting up a business to burn toxins from the whole country of Ireland - that's a different kettle of fish. We are in new territory here as is Indaver.

WE need to pause and plan and look for a sustainable way to manage waste. We have decided here in Cork to go for MBT a more benign way of managing waste, less risk. less cost, less air pollution, water pollution, environmental pollution, - why?

Because we can.

by Linda Fitzpatrick - CHASE Mon Jun 15, 2009 21:06

CHASE PRESS RELEASE - Monday June 15, 2009
 
Explosive evidence was presented at this mornings Oral Hearing by Mr Peter Daly, Chief Emergency Management Officer for the HSE (Health Services Executive), South, whose function in that role is to prepare emergency plans for the HSE for all type of Major Emergencies.  Mr Daly said that distances claimed to be safe by Indaver would be regarded as well inside the danger zones by Public Response Agencies in the event of an accident or emergency.

Mr Daly said that should an accident occur, response plans prepared by Principle Response Agencies would define a 'Warm Zone' that "in this instance will at least include the public road" and "will carefully consider the risk of allowing even their own staff into that Warm Zone".  The Warm Zone is described as being inside the 'Inner Cordon' where "airborne concentrations above which the general population could experience irreversible or other serious effects occur".  Mr Daly also said that

- credible scenarios MUST include the possibility of a Vapour Cloud Explosion, which is currently omitted
- in the event of an emergency there is insufficient infrastructure with only one entry and the same exit point to and from the same area
- the occupants of the NMCI (Maritime College) should not be required to evacuate in the direction of the incident, indeed to within a few meters of the proposed plant

Mr Daly is a former Defense Forces Engineering Officer and served as a Chemical Weapons Inspector to UNSCOM in Iraq.  He holds a postgraduate qualification in Mechanical Engineering, and has made a study of the Seveso Legislation and related matters.  He stressed that he made his submission as a private individual, but that the detailed knowledge he has in relation to Seveso issues is a result of his education, training, experience and derived from his current HSE responsibilities.
 

Outlining the process by which Principle Response Agencies prepare emergency plans at Seveso sites, which use the Public Safety Zone as a basis for emergency response, Mr Daly said  "The Public Safety Zone (PSZ) addresses low probability scenarios.  These incidents may however be of high consequence.  In the unlikely event of an incident occurring there will be casualties with varying degrees of injury.  The Public Safety Zone consists essentially of three zones i.e. Hot, Warm and Cold (Zones).  Distances claimed as safe in the application would be regarded by the Public Response Agencies in emergency response as well inside a PSZ Warm circle.  The area that they would regard as being in a 'warm zone' would be significantly greater than the perimeter of the plant."

Mr Daly also highlighted that in planning an emergency response, the Public Response Agencies must provide for primary and secondary access as a basic tenet.  He said "This principle is not achievable in the proposed site. The area is effectively a cul-de-sac with only one entry point and if that entry point along the Ringaskiddy road is compromised then the Public Response Agencies will be significantly affected with the potential of very serious consequences.
 
The same principles dictate that "the concept of persons being evacuated from the Maritime College being compelled to move towards the facility, before being able to flee to the left or to the right will be of significant and on-going concern."."
 
ENDS

by COBHITE 74 - HEALTH AND HAPINESS Sun Jun 14, 2009 11:58

a STACK 83 mts high really tells the true horror of this monster . WHY SO TALL I SAY IT IS TO DISPERSE THE KILLER TOXINS OVER AS WIDE AN AREA AS POSSIBLE . SO when people start to DIE prematurely INDAVER CAN SAY NOT US .IF the stack was 10 mts high the death rate will be sooner and greater as the poisions fall on all like rain .I can only PRAY THIS NEVER NEVER HAPPENS .LONG LIVE CHASE .HEALTH IS WEALTH WE OWE THIS AT LEAST TO OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN

COBHITE 74

by Blonde Fri Jun 12, 2009 22:39

Hey Shoegirl,

I'm not sure how serious your question is, given that you've already answered it. Too many are employed (or at least were employed!) in the pharmachem sector to risk antagonising them and alienating the whole business community.

Plus, those incinerators are part of the status quo, any problem with them should have been being raised before the current campaign to keep Indaver out.

And they are small, and the pharmachems are moving towards waste prevention for cost purposes.

But wow, why didn't we click that they, not Irish Steel, could have caused the elevated Cancer rates in Cobh?

Thanks for that!

by shoegirl Fri Jun 12, 2009 16:22

So can anybody in CHASE or StS actually explain why you are not protesting outside the factories of the two companies who are currently incinerating industrial waste in the area? I'd be very interested to hear why not.

by shoegirl Fri Jun 12, 2009 16:18

I've always felt that one of the big reasons why CHASE failed to entirely block Indaver is that they conveniently ignore the existence of large industrial incinerators in at least 2 factories in Curabinny.

The fact that there is already incineration going on, you would have thought would have been used as evidence either way - incredible that its just been ignored in my opinion.

I suspect part of the reason for it, though, is that a lot of local people work at these two facilities and local protestors don't want to threaten existing jobs.

by Linda Fitzpatrick - CHASE Fri Jun 05, 2009 23:58

CHASE
Cork Harbour Alliance
For a Safe Environment
Www.chaseirela

PRESS RELEASE - 4 June 2009

Department Of Environment Circular To Planning Authorities Confirms Policy Moving Away From Incineration

A Circular issued (Fri 29 May) by John Gormley to all planning authorities makes it clear that mechanical and biological treatments, not incineration, are to be the cornerstones of national waste policy in the future and outlines that the Minister will instruct local authorities and the EPA to "refrain from exercising their powers in such a way as to direct waste to landfill or incineration." (Full Text at end)

This circular was sent to all City and County Managers and Environment Directors, to An Bord Pleanala and the EPA. The circular states that the Programme for Government emphasises in particular movements away from the high reliance on incineration forseen in the National Development Plan, and increases commitment to the use of alternative technologies, including those known as mehanical and biological treatment.

The circular also states that the Minister has initiated a process which would require the EPA and local authorities
- to refrain from exercising their powers in such a way as to direct waste to lanfill or incineration
- to limit incineration capacity to ensure that waste is not drawn to incineration which could have been dealt with by recycling or other methods higher up the waste hierarchy

CHASE has welcomed this clarification, and says "This policy movement away from incineration, towards waste minimisation and resource focused solutions is very significant. It is a positive step towards achieving the developent of a waste and resource policy as set out in the Programme for Government (Department Statement of Strategy 2008 - 2010) , and reinforces policy already adopted by Cork City and County Councils, who are currently on target to meet 2012 landfill directives without any need for incineration. Cork City Council has stated in addition that they will look towards modular, flexible solutions if the need arises to meet 2016 solutions. These clear moves away from incineration leave Indavers incinerator with no role to play in Waste Management."

The Oral Hearing resumes on Monday next 8 June at Cork International Airport Hotel.

ENDS

________________________________

Full Text from Department of the Environment is below:

May 2009 Circular

Update on progress in respect of implementing the waste management provisions of the Programme for Government

I am directed by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to update you on progress in respect of implementing the waste management provisions of the Programme for Government, and in particular the commitment to conduct an international review of waste management policy.

The Programme for Government makes major commitments in relation to national waste policy. In particular, there is an emphasis on moving away from the high reliance on incineration foreseen in the National Development Plan and reflected in the regional waste management plans for which the local authorities have statutory responsibility, generally operating in regional groupings. In this regard it is intended that there be an increased commitment to the use of alternative technologies, including those known as mechanical and biological treatment.

The Department’s Statement of Strategy 2008-2010, which is published on the Department’s web site and which was noted by Government in July 2008, states:

"The new Programme for Government indicates a further development of waste and resource policy in the direction of sustainability, in particular, to move away from mass burn incineration towards alternative technologies and to minimise waste going to landfill, subject to the outcome of the review of the waste management strategy. This major international review being undertaken by the Department will address how best to implement waste prevention and minimisation, and the emergence of new technologies in waste management."

Progress on the review of waste management strategy
Consultants have been retained to conduct the study of waste policy options which will underpin the conclusion of the overall review later this year. This work is well advanced and a series of interim reports has been considered by the Review Steering Group. It is considered that the study itself should be concluded on time, July 2009, with policy proposals being brought to Government shortly thereafter.

Interim policy measures
While this work is on target, it is acknowledged that progress towards meeting Ireland’s targets under the Landfill Directive and the requirements of the recently adopted Waste Framework Directive cannot wait. Therefore the Minister is pressing ahead with key initiatives which are compatible with the overall objectives of the review in order to meet the targets. These include:
increase in the landfill levy and the introduction of a levy on incineration;
roll-out of brown bin collections;
intensifying efforts to promote at source/home composting;
supporting small-scale local composting initiatives;
encouraging access to waste streams for composting/anaerobic digestion, recycling and other processes high on the waste hierarchy; and,
source segregated collection of commercial biowaste.

The Minister has also initiated a Strategic Environmental Assessment on proposed policy directions to the EPA and local authorities which would (in relation to their functions under the Waste Management Acts and any instruments made thereunder), inter alia, require the recipients to:
limit incineration capacity to ensure that waste is not drawn to incineration which could have been dealt with by recycling or other methods higher up the waste hierarchy;
refrain from exercising their powers in such a way as to direct waste to landfill or incineration.

The proposed policy direction is subject to consultation with both the public and all stakeholders, including local authorities.

The above are interim actions intended to help meet the Landfill Directive targets while implementing the commitments in the Programme for Government. The Minister considers that they are in line with the policies emerging from the overall review.

Queries in relation to this Circular may be addressed to the undersigned.

Yours sincerely,

­­­­

Michael Layde

Principal Officer
Waste Policy: Review and Regulation

+353 1 888 2434
+353 1 888 2797 (Fax)

michael.layde@environ.ie
www.environ.ie

TO: Each County and City Manager, each Director of Services (environment)
CC: Director General, Environmental Protection Agency; Chief Officer, An Bord Pleanala

by Baywatch Thu May 21, 2009 19:54

Miriam if I get this right Indaver bought the site ten years ago, have pumped millions into trying to build on it, and have been prevented from even turning over a shovel full of earth.

Is there anyplace else you can say that about? Rossport? Tara? Carrickmines?

The strategy, whatever it is, seems to be working pretty well so far.

by maire Thu May 21, 2009 15:26

Anna,
Indaver made the choice to become stuck between a rock and a hard place. (They believe the rock is gold)
They have taken no responsibility for any calamity that takes place outside this undersized site, which would require toxic lorries to perhaps park outside on the road, which could be flooded.
Nor have they taken any responsibility for what goes on inside their site which they share with a car shredding metal company, and a boundary on an eroding soft cliff, which must be moved every year.
This proposed incinerator would be built on a stoney beach !!!

by Lisa Wed May 20, 2009 10:10

First Cinderella, then Homer Simpson, gee all the famous cartoon characters are up for shouts it's such a bad choice of site. Any good satirists would have such great material with the site choice.

Homer's Site Selection Guidelines 0.61 Mb