Jump to content

Incinerator for Warrington


Horace
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've not seen anything on here about the plan to have an incinerator in Warrington, which surprises me. We have had a huge public inquiry in Frodsham about a similar plan nearby. There was huge opposition, from local councils, the county council and from residents.

The supporters of incineration put forward a persuasive argument so I hope you don't fall for it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not seen anything on here about the plan to have an incinerator in Warrington, which surprises me. We have had a huge public inquiry in Frodsham about a similar plan nearby. There was huge opposition, from local councils, the county council and from residents. The supporters of incineration put forward a persuasive argument so I hope you don't fall for it

 

Not sure I follow you there Horace - if the developer puts forward a persuasive argument, why should we immediately discount it :?: if I remember, the local organisation you are on about was "CHAIN" (Cheshire Against Incineration) - led by a bloke who used to work for an incineration company (hypocrisy?). I think it was the "Ince Marshes" scheme wasn't it? Or was that the one over in Ellesmere Port? There are so many.

 

Still, what is inherently wrong with incineration as an alternative to landfill :?:

 

Is it the tenuous links between atmospheric emissions and carcinogenic effects on the local population? I must confess that I was not at all surprised by the finding that more people "up North" get cancer than those down south, but I am more ready to believe that this is due to inequalities in health care than any malign environmental factors that are unique to the North of England.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coincidentally, I was suggesting the same approach on another topic McB! :wink: Landfill, can be usefull for landform, and could be applied to securing levies to protect against fllooding. :? However, landfill produces gases which unless tapped for incineration (and energy production), merely leaks into the atmosphere. :roll: Local incinerators allows for waste to be burned and provides energy for local use - so basically a more efficient disposal mechanism. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the group you are talking about is RAIN - Residents Against Incineration. But the Ince Marshes incinerator is also opposed by Cheshire County Council, Vale Royal Council and various other bodies.

I know experts can always be found to differ and, in those circumstances, I prefer to adopt a policy of "If in doubt, don't"

Apparently in Lancashire no incinerators are planned and they plan to use a system known as accelerated anoerobic digestion (hope I have spelled it correctly!).

No-one has satisfactorily explained why this method could not be used, as far as I know. What's good for Lancs should be OK for Cheshire too.

 

I think Observer has a good point too. Landfill could be used to build up the land in areas subject to flooding - and the methane could be used for energy.

So I am afraid I am not persuaded!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So thats where Warringtons wildlife hang out on the days when they're not fighting and throwing up in Bridge street, or troughing in MacDonalds :D:D:D:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know experts can always be found to differ and, in those circumstances, I prefer to adopt a policy of "If in doubt, don't"

 

What a pioneering outlook! Good job there are those who say "let's give this a whirl and see if it works" or we'd still be sitting in caves wondering if it might be an idea to try and grow something to eat instead of running around trying to hit it with clubs until it was dead :!:

 

I think Observer has a good point too. Landfill could be used to build up the land in areas subject to flooding - and the methane could be used for energy.

 

I take issue with Obs point about landraising using landfill material - it would result in seriously unstable landforms which - if they did flood - have the potential to result in an almost catastrophic influx of fluid-borne waste materials into the water table, rivers, sewer systems etc. In essence, you'd be condoning the "washing" of huge piles of rubbish by flood water. Not only that, you cannot build on landfill so the land would be sterile from a development perspective. You might as well leave it alone, unpolluted and in a flood zone rather than balls it up in such a manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I,m sure your aware McB; the correct method of landfill, is to encase the "waste" in a clay seal, otherwise your point would apply to all existing landfill sites leaking toxins into the water table - and maybe some older sites do?! :shock: There are various types of waste in any case, building rubble, escavated earth etc that could be used for barrier defences along the rivers and the coast to protect low lying areas, and of course, they are not intended to be "built on", as niether is the flood plain, but that hasn't stopped Governments or Developers in the past. :roll: I don't advocate this as a primary disposal method, merely an added option for suitable types of waste; I'm happy to go with incineration or the new bio-breakdown systems, where a bi-product can be energy production. :? However, I find the current approach quite ludicrous, in that, we allow huge amounts of excess packaging to continue to be produced, then try to penalise consumers for it's disposal, much better to not create such waste in the first place. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's many problems with incinerators, firstly they pollute the atmosphere and I can't blame anybody not wanting to live near one. Secondly, in areas of the UK where they have been built, there have been problems with getting enough waste into them to make them cost effective. This has led to recycling rates falling as waste is diverted to feed the incinerator - will look out some links later but, believe me this is the case.

 

I've also just googled Warrington incinerator and the only significant hit I get is for a medical incinerator which is totally different to the one discussed at Ince Marshes etc. Do you have any more details?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alison

 

The medical waste incinerator was voted a none starter by the whole of the council following a huge public outcry about the proposed location in a residential area.

 

That was a couple of years back now and despite the fact that many said the company would bankrupt WBC if they continued to oppose their planning application it all seams to have just died a death.

 

Bill :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I note no-one has commented on the accelerated anoerobic digestion system which I suggested some time back.

 

As for McBain's sarcastic comments, it is all very well having a pioneering spirit when it is clear no harm can come from it. But with incineration, I believe the clarity is not there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's actually spelt Anaerobic :wink:

 

'Anaerobic digestion' where micro-organisms are used to break down biodegradable material in the absence of oxygen.

 

It's used to treat wastewater sludges and organic wastes etc because reduces the volume and mass of what was originally input.

 

As part of an integrated waste management system it can reduces the emission of landfill gas into the atmosphere.

 

The process produces a methane and carbon dioxide rich biogas suitable for energy production helping replace fossil fuels.

 

And the solids left aftter 'digestion' are nutrient-rich solids and can be used as fertiliser.

 

The word accelerated just means they are adding a little something to speed up the natual process :shock::wink:

 

Suped up micro-organisms and bacteria .. :shock: Mmmmm

 

Anyway throwing that worry aside it actually sounds quite good :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...