On the day Prosiect Gwyrdd led by Russell Goodway gets the Go ahead for Prosiect Gwyrdd..
South Wales WIN says:
This will prove a very costly day for taxpayers in Cardiff and the other Councils. Max Wallis added "The bureaucrats have forced through a 25-year promise to send wastes for old technology incineration, a dismal 22% efficient in energy terms. Cllr Russell Goodway, Chairman of the Joint Committee is wrong to say they will make significant savings from this project."
Anne Greagsby said "Much of the promised wastes are recyclable materials and we expect that increasingly stricter requirements on recycling will ban burning of them. Like other Councils in England who contracted for excessive tonnages of waste, future councils in Cardiff, Newport, Caerphilly, Monmouth and the Vale of Glamorgan will have to try and escape from this huge long-term burden."
Response from SNIC :
"Rob Hepworth, the Bishton-based Chair of Stop Newport and Monmouthshire Incinerator Campaign (SNIC) warned that this was not the end of the story. He said
" What more can you expect from a cabal of profiteering corporate interests and biased officials who want to impose waste policies on SE Wales that are at least 20 years out of date? SNIC believe the decision is illegal as well as perverse. If it is allowed, we will pay an unacceptable price in terms of cancer deaths, increased carbon emissions, lower recycling and higher taxes on Newport & Monmouthshire people.”
SNIC Vice Chair Haydn Cullen-Jones of Monmouth added
“We will be sending today’s announcement to the European Commission as we believe it constitutes, unagreed and hence unlawful, state aid to a private, speculative waste incinerator already under construction in Cardiff. Sadly PG have settled for the next worst solution to landfilling residual waste and guaranteed £400m of taxpayers money into the bargain.
" Monmouthshire is already close to the 2025 70% target for recycling and hence will end up paying more and more per tonne of residual waste for the next 25 years. While incineration in the guise of Energy from Waste is so heavily subsidised, it is no surprise that other more financially and environmentally viable processes have been disregarded."
Contact SNIC - Rob Hepworth 01633 413253 firstname.lastname@example.org
Future future plans for a district heating network are total fantasy as the cost would be enormous
5% Recycling from bottom ash with no market for use as aggregate for building materials
Silence on toxic ash - where will it go?
Produces significant quantities of CO2.
Long-term council contracts to provide waste for incinerators will
discourage waste reduction, reuse and recycling efforts.
THE BIG ISSUES THAT GOODWAY hasn't answered
Prosiect Gwyrdd contract with Viridor
Dear Cllr Goodway,
We believe that you as chair of PG take ultimate responsibility for the key financial issues being properly checked prior to signing the huge contract with Viridor.
The answers on two basic financial issues appear to be outstanding
1. State Aid – the risk of the European Commission ruling the 25% WG subsidy to be illegal has not been accessed by Accounting officers
2. No updated Value-for-Money assessment has been made, neither by the Project or by the WG review.
You should be aware that the National Audit Office has just announced it is investigating three 25-yr incinerator contracts in England www.nao.org.uk/press-releases/defras-oversight-pfi-waste-projects/;
also that Defra withdrew WIC (waste infrastructure credits) last week for the Norfolk CC’s incinerator, putting Norfolk CC in trouble over their recent 25-yr contract www.letsrecycle.com/news/latest-news/councils/defra-withdraws-ps169m-norfolk-efw-funding
You may have seen that EdF yesterday specified the State Aid issue as needing a decision before they sign the Hinkley Point nuclear deal.
We question that the Project officers are capable of giving appropriate advice on these issues and suggest appropriate independent experts should be consulted, eg. the WAO who are already considering the PG contract.
From Cardiff Against the Incinerator CATI
recycling pays as the Environmental Scrutiny Committee point out today but we have just agreed to pay to burn it??
questions to the Environmental Scrutiny Committee
at Committee Room 4 County Hall Date: 10/12/2013 Start: 04:30 PM
- Environmental Scrutiny Committee Agenda 10/12/13 (100k)
- Cardiff - An Energy Resilient City? (187k)
- Income Generation from Recycling (195k)
Questions for todays cmte
INCOME GENERATION FROM RECYCLING
ENVIRONMENTAL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE: 10th DECEMBER 2013 item 5
The recycling “targets” in para.2 are minimum statutory levels; far below best practice “sustainable” living. Surely Cardiff will rate poorly in sustainability comparisons if we can’t surpass 70% recycling well before 2020?
Para.4 Why are Cardiff not aiming at 54% recycling this year, towards the 2015/16 minimum of 58%?
Is the low income from recycling this year £53/t due in part or whole to contamination from Lamby Way outputs?
NOTE the income figures in para.12 mostly exceed the £53/t , so are there losses from rejected substandard bales, or percentages taken by dealers?
Could Cardiff expect to double or quadruple the £53/t average income with kerbside-sort collection of para.16 ?
How much rejected at Lamby Way ?
para. 8 has 5770 tonnes unaccounted (30%); can this be reduced?
Re. para. 16: “anticipated that Welsh recycling targets will continue to increase to 2024/25 and beyond” and your analysis of black-bag waste showing it contains 80% recyclable materials in some areas, what level of recycling do you now consider is achievable?
What about the Viridor incineration contract - have the waste tonnages been revised, as Prosiect Gwyrdd assumed 70% recycling would stay past 2025 to 2042?