Call for inquiry into lack of minutes from waste incinerator meetings

Campaigners against a proposed €160 million waste incinerator for Cork Harbour have called for an investigation into the absence of any record of notes from two meetings in 2011 between executives from the company behind the project and civil servants. Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (Chase) said it had learned through a Freedom of Information (FoI) request that the meetings took place between Indaver executives and officials from the Department of the Environment without any note of the meetings being placed in the planning file. According to the Chase spokeswoman, Linda Fitzpatrick, the campaign group had sought information from the department on any meetings between it and Indaver and the company’s agents or representatives in 2011.

Read the full story @ The Irish Times

Expert challenges risk study for incinerator

TOXICOLOGICAL EFFECTS of nano-particles such as those produced from an incinerator stack can be responsible for exacerbating human health problems including asthma, bronchitis and heart disease, according to a scientific expert who gave evidence on behalf of objectors at a public hearing yesterday.

Prof C Vyvyan Howard described Indaver Ireland’s risk assessment of possible health problems associated with a proposed toxic waste incinerator at Ringaskiddy in Cork as “simplistic” and “fundamentally flawed”.

His claims were disputed by Indaver Ireland. Prof Howard, who is in charge of of bioimaging at the University of Ulster, has written and spoken in a variety of forums to draw attention to the threat posed by pollutants to developing foetuses and infants.

Speaking on behalf of anti-incinerator campaign group Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment at a hearing on the proposed incinerator yesterday, Prof Howard, described as a medically qualified toxico-pathologist, claimed there were airborne particles for which there was no known safe level, and that Indaver Ireland’s risk assessment did not cover the emittance of such particles. “The risk assessment in relation to particles that has been undertaken by Indaver is rather simplistic and appears to ignore the very significant contribution made to particulate burdens made by sulphur dioxide and especially nitrous oxide emissions.”

Prof Howard said while effects of individual toxins were known, the effects of multiple toxins in the air was unknown, and research into such effects was difficult.

Indaver Ireland’s risk assessment is based on the effects of individual toxins as per Environmental Protection Agency air quality standards.

“This approach is fundamentally flawed for those emissions like particles, for which no safe level can be demonstrated,” Prof Howard said.

Air pollution levels well within legal limits were killing people, he claimed, “especially older people and those with chronic heart and lung ailments”. Children and foetuses were particularly at risk from airborne pollutant particles, as their immune system and lungs were not fully developed, he said.

“There can be no doubt that children and even the foetus are particularly vulnerable to particle air pollutants, while this has been largely overlooked in setting current standards and controls,” he said.

He cited a review by scientists Joachim Heinrich and Remy Slama showing fine particle pollutants had been associated with infant mortality, impaired lung function and, less consistently, with sudden infant death syndrome.

In his report, Prof Howard claimed Indaver had “completely omitted any consideration of secondary particles and their impacts from their assessments”, which he said can account for a major fraction of the particles emitted by incinerators, despite filtration.

It was claimed that a high proportion of ultra-fine particles emitted through the incineration process evaded filtration systems.

“The subsequent direct uptake of these respirable particles and the ready transfer from the lungs into the bloodstream may be part of the reason that traditional toxicology is at a loss to explain the level of impacts for such apparently low exposures,” he said.

An Indaver Ireland spokesman said Prof Howard’s opinion was “at odds” with views of the World Health Organisation, EU and EPA. “Dioxins are all around us every day. Traffic, home heating and agriculture are among the main dioxin contributors. WHO and EU set safe level limits for dioxin emissions, and expert analysis has shown that the proposed development will have a minuscule effect,” the spokesman said.

The hearing is expected to continue until the end of next week.

Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

No need for plant to burn waste, says TD

A SHIFT in Government policy toward waste reduction and recycling has bolstered the case against a proposed toxic waste incinerator to be built at Ringaskiddy, Cork, it was claimed by a Fine Gael TD at the public hearing yesterday.

An Bord Pleanála’s oral hearing into the proposed incinerator reconvened in Cork yesterday following a three-week break.

Fine Gael east Cork TD David Stanton said that following the recent polls he was addressing the hearing as a member of the “country’s largest political party” which is committed to “waste management on the prevention and minimisation of waste and the provision of recycling facilities”.

Mr Stanton said there has been a change in national government policy since the incinerator planning process began in 2001, with focus on recycling taking precedence over the need for an incinerator to be built.

As part of a Dáil discussion, in reply to questions, Green Party leader John Gormley said that Government policy supports the principles of internationally recognised waste hierarchy that places emphasis on “prevention, reuse and recycling of waste while minimising reliance on landfill and incineration”.

“Meeting this obligation will entail doubling the existing level of diversion from landfill by 2010 and further increases in diversion in subsequent years. The programme also signalled a move away from mass-burn incineration towards alternative technologies.

“Undue emphasis on incineration as the cornerstone of waste management policy is detrimental to the development of alternative solutions,” Mr Gormley said.

Mr Stanton referred to the recent circular issued by Mr Gormley reiterating a policy move away from incineration toward alternative waste management solutions including “mechanical and biological treatment”.

Chairwoman of Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (Chase) Mary O’Leary presented a 16-page submission against the proposed Indaver incinerator.

“To have this monster in our harbour would always be a constant reminder that it is there 24/7 damaging our environment and health,” Ms O’Leary said.

Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

Warning on effects of Cork waste plan

A HAZARDOUS waste incinerator planned for Ringaskiddy in Cork harbour could worsen traffic delays on an already congested route, according to the National Roads Authority (NRA).

In a submission to An Bord Pleanála, the NRA outlined its position on the effect the proposed incinerator might have on the surrounding road network.

NRA regional manager Paul Moran told a hearing on the proposed waste facility that while the authority was not opposed to the project in principle, it could have an adverse effect on traffic.

“The proposal would have the potential to adversely contribute to existing unsatisfactory capacity issues on the N28 and the national road infrastructure within its catchment,” Mr Moran said.

The N28 is a national primary road that links Cork city to Ringaskiddy, where a number of major industries are located, including a deep-water port for Cork, roll-on, roll-off ferry terminal and the headquarters for the Irish Naval Service.

He said lands required for the proposed upgraded N28, which would facilitate the development of the incinerator, were located inside the development lands, raising concerns about the time frame and expense of the project.

“The authority notes with concern that these lands are designated for stockpiling material and also as the construction site for the transfer station facility.

“This raised concerns regarding planning, compensation, timing issues and reclamation requirements which could arise in the context of the authority’s advancement of the proposed N28 road scheme,” Mr Moran said.

The NRA asked that no work as part of the incinerator development take place on such lands without its consent.

The authority also asked that no funds from the exchequer be used to cater for specific works intended to serve the proposed development, such as access to the incinerator site.

NRA senior policy adviser in planning, Tara Spain, said the authority had a clearly defined programme of work up until the end of 2010, but no precise guarantees could be given to any other projects in terms of timeframe, because of uncertain funding for future NRA projects.

However, planning and design of the proposed N28 had been “substantially completed”.

Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

Conflicting evidence on incinerator given at planning hearing

CONFLICTING EVIDENCE about the impact of the proposed €150 million incinerator planned for Ringaskiddy in Cork Harbour on the architectural heritage of the area was given at the public hearing yesterday.

The impact would be minimal in the context that it is already an industrialised area, according to archaeologist Deirdre Sutton on behalf of Indaver Ireland.

She told An Bord Pleanála’s hearing that one of the notable archaeological features she found in her assessment was a Martello Tower in Ringaskiddy which is a protected structure.

But the tower is located some 70m to the south of the proposed incinerator and will not be affected or impacted by the facility while construction work on the incinerator will not cause any vibrations to the tower, she said.

Ms Sutton acknowledged that views of the tower would be visually impacted from the northeast by the incinerator but said the tower would be visible from most locations around the harbour.

She suggested the impact of the incinerator when viewed from the tower might be mitigated by colouring the incinerator building and constructing a landscaped earthen mounding between the tower and the incinerator. The proposed incinerator would not prevent the development of Spike Island as a heritage site in the harbour contrary to what some objectors had argued in a planning board submission.

However, environmental consultant Marcia D’Alton, on behalf of Cork Harbour Environmental Protection Association, disagreed in her submission and said the facility would have an adverse effect on the heritage of the area.

Ms D’Alton said the tower was the biggest of five such towers to be built in the harbour which are different to the 47 others built in Ireland during Napoleonic times and it was the only one with a dry moat cut into the rock.

The tower is an integral part of historic fortifications including Fort Camden and Fort Carlyle around the harbour built by the British in the 19th century which the Cork Harbour Forum group is seeking to market abroad as a unified tourist attraction, she said.

The tower was built at the peak of the Ringaskiddy promontory to prevent an enemy from taking the hill and bringing batteries to bear on Fort Westmoreland, the major fortification on Spike Island.

Indaver had suggested the construction of an artificial earthen berm or mounding would disguise the top of the process building from the tower and this should be done in such a fashion as not to block the wider harbour views.

However, given the tower is built 47m above sea level and the ultimate height of the incinerator building is 48.27m, views of the harbour intrinsic to the function of the tower will be blocked irrespective of how organic the mounding is, said Ms D’Alton.

Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

Incinerator oral hearing to resume

AN ORAL hearing by An Bord Pleanála into a proposed €150 million incinerator planned for Ringaskiddy in Cork Harbour will resume today when objectors to the proposal will get an opportunity to question the developers on their submissions.

Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (Chase) and other opponents of the plan will start their questioning of experts called by Indaver Ireland who last week made submissions on various aspects of the proposal including air quality, traffic impact and safety risks.

Among those likely to be questioned at length by Chase and others this week is Indaver’s medical expert, Dr Martin Hogan, who presented a submission based on a review of a number of studies of the impact of incinerators on public health.

Dr Hogan said most of the published studies looked at incinerators whose emissions of dioxins, dust and heavy metal were far greater than would be emitted by a modern waste resource recovery facility such as that proposed by Indaver for Ringaskiddy.

He quoted from a report published in 2004 by the UK department of the environment, food and rural affairs which did not find a link between the current generation of municipal solid-waste incinerators and health effects.

“We looked in detail at studies of incineration facilities and found no consistent or convincing evidence of a link between cancer and incineration. There is little evidence that emissions from incinerators make respiratory problems worse.

“In most cases, the incinerator contributes only a small proportion to local levels of pollutants,” Dr Hogan claimed, before going on to refer to the Health Research Board’s 2003 report, Health and Environmental Effects of Landfilling and Incineration of Waste.

Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

Findings say incinerator would pass air guides

EMISSIONS FROM a hazardous waste incinerator planned for Ringaskiddy in Cork harbour will be in compliance with the ambient air quality standards set down in law, an expert witness on behalf of the developers of the incinerator has told the public hearing.

Air quality consultant Dr Edward Porter told the hearing he had used two models to examine the quality of air emissions from the proposed incinerator. Both confirmed that emissions would be within existing ambient air quality standards.

Making a submission on behalf of Indaver Ireland, Dr Porter said he had obtained meteorological data from Cork airport from 2003- 2007 to feed into his two models.

He said the Ringaskiddy facility would have two main emission points or flues within the one 85 metre stack, with one flue taking emissions from the grate incinerator, the other taking emissions from a post-combustion chamber.

“The results show that the combination of stringent emission limits laid down in the waste incineration directive and the selected stack height are appropriate in ensuring that the ambient air quality standards are not exceeded.”

In a detailed submission, Dr Porter said the results showed that sulphur dioxide, carbon monoxide and total dust emissions under maximum conditions ranged from 10 per cent to 33 per cent of the ambient air quality standards at the nearest test receptor point.

Dr Porter added that the proposed facility would not have any impact on climate change, in line with incinerators generally.

Safety expert Thomas Cleary, for Indaver, said Ringaskiddy was classified as a Seveso site – which covers a European directive on control of major accidents involving dangerous substances – because of the various wastes likely to be handled there, including aqueous wastes, waste solvents, flammable materials and harmful solid wastes.

He said the waste tanks would be relatively small with the largest being just 400 cubic metres. The main solvent tanks would be at the southern side of the site and shielded from the Ringaskiddy Road by the incinerator plant itself.

Mr Cleary acknowledged there had been explosions and fires at incinerators which resulted in fatalities, but such fatalities had been confined to those on the site.

Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

Opposition to Rathcoole incinerator expressed at oral hearing

A RANGE of issues from traffic to possible adverse effects on human and animal health, to the height of a proposed chimney stack, were raised by politicians objecting to an incinerator planned for west Dublin yesterday.

The politicians - including Minister of State at the Department of Community, Rural, and Gaeltacht Affairs John Curran, Fine Gael's Senate leader Frances Fitzgerald and Kildare North TDs Bernard Durkan (FG), and Emmet Stagg (Lab) - individually told a Bord Pleanála oral hearing the application should be refused.

Energy Answers International is seeking permission through Bord Pleanála's strategic infrastructure division for a €200 million incinerator with ability to recover sufficient energy to power 43,000 homes. The plant would use 365,000 tonnes of residual municipal waste; recover ferrous and non-ferrous metals; and use boiler ash in the manufacture of concrete blocks. It would be located in a quarry known as Behan's Quarry, some 3km (2 miles) from Rathcoole, west Dublin.

On the conclusion of the applicant's submission for permission yesterday, Ms Fitzgerald described the project as "premature". She said Minister for the Environment John Gormley and the Government had indicated a review of waste management policy was under way. In advance of this the application could "make incineration the cornerstone of such a policy".

"Under the Planning Act 2000 the Minister could have taken this step and informed the hearing that this incinerator is not required to meet capacity. It is disappointing that he did not do this," she said.

Ms Fitzgerald was supported by party colleague Bernard Durkan who also maintained the capacity of the proposed plant, at 365,000 tonnes per year, was unnecessary and contrary to the waste management plans of local authorities.

Labour's Emmet Stagg said that he had established by parliamentary questions to Mr Gormley and former taoiseach Bertie Ahern that the "the proposal was not in accordance with Government policy".

John Curran questioned the height of the chimney of the proposed facility and whether its location - low in the quarry - would result in the stack being only about 9m above the landscape.

The hearing was addressed by environmentalist Peter Sweetman who insisted that a number of assertions in the application were either misleading or inaccurate.

The application is also being opposed by local groups, including Rathcoole Against Incinerator Dioxins. Spokesman Liam McDermott said the community expected to be asked to outline its objections this week.

The Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

Incinerator group in legal costs plea after failing in Supreme Court appeal

CAMPAIGNERS fighting plans for the country’s first toxic waste incinerator have pleaded with the Government not to pursue them for substantial legal costs following what they called a “devastating” court ruling.

The Supreme Court awarded costs to the State and to Indaver against residents of Cork Harbour relating to its decision in July not to adjourn incinerator cases pending a European Court of Justice case against Ireland.

The court said as this appeal had failed, there was no reason for it to depart from the normal practice of requiring the unsuccessful party to be responsible for costs.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and An Bórd Pleanála told the court they are not looking for their costs.

Residents fighting the €75 million incinerator are facing a substantial legal bill, potentially hundreds of thousands of euro.

Labour TD Ciarán Lynch said the decision will have huge financial implications for people around the country “sticking up for their own community”.

“This will undermine the principle of the participation by community groups in public debate and public campaigns,” he said.

Green Party Senator Dan Boyle said he was very unhappy with the decision.

“The State can and should withdraw its demand for costs and I will argue that point to Government,” he said.

Indaver managing director John Ahern said he will not make a decision on the costs until other cases pending have been determined.

“We question the wisdom of the objectors continuing with a case which we believe we will be successful in,” he said.

The Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (CHASE) said the Supreme Court decision sent shockwaves through harbour communities.

CHASE chairwoman Mary O’Leary said this would be “an acid test” of Environment Minister John Gormley’s “green credentials”.

“He must ensure that the communities who sought important clarification on a matter of planning law don’t suffer for bringing this to the state’s attention,” she said.

Ms O’Leary and Mr Gormley were among a delegation which travelled to Brussels in spring 2004 to lodge a complaint with the EU about alleged breaches of planning law.

It led to a European Court of Justice case against the State on the grounds of non-compliance with an European Commission (EC) directive on Environmental Impact Assessments on significant projects.

The residents wanted judicial review proceedings relating to the incinerator adjourned, pending the outcome of the EU’s case against Ireland.

Ms O’Leary said groups fighting the incinerator will be pleading with Mr Gormley not to pursue them for costs.

“We should not be punished to bringing this to the attention of the State,” she said.

The minister is due to open a climate change conference in Cork on Friday and is likely to be met with protests.

More than 30,000 people have objected to the planned incinerator, citing health concerns.

Irish Examiner

www.buckplanning.ie

Nobber incinerator hearing postponed

AN BORD Pleanála has confirmed that it has postponed the oral hearing due to take place next week into a proposed biomass incinerator at Nobber in Co Meath. Earlier this week the inspector chairing the hearing had said it would go ahead as planned.

The decision to defer it has been welcomed by opponents of the development, particularly as the board referred to a point made by them to the inspector about insufficient time having been allowed to other councils and individuals to prepare their submissions. The two-week oral hearing was due to start next Tuesday to hear objections to plans by rendering company College Proteins to build an eight megawatt biomass incinerator and ash landfill at its existing plant in Nobber.

The company says that two megawatts would be used for its own operations and “the balance will be exported to the country’s national electricity grid. That represents the electricity demand of about 4,000 homes.”

At the preliminary hearing on Monday last, local councillor Eugene Cassidy said the planning board had written to seven neighbouring local authorities advising them they could make submissions. However, this was done two weeks ago and because no council meetings are held in August he said that no submissions could be ratified until next month.

The group asked for the inspector to adjourn the hearing to allow this and other points to be addressed and when she ruled it would go ahead, North East Against Incineration (NEAI) said it would seek legal advice on securing a High Court injunction against the planning board.

Yesterday morning the group received a letter from the board saying they had postponed the hearing to allow neighbouring authorities to make submissions or observations on the application.

The other county councils were given copies of the application last month and NEAI expects they will be given 10 weeks to make their observations. Its spokesman Christy Reilly said they welcomed the decision by the board. “It confirms we had valid points to make. We feel it is a small victory for us but we have a long way to go yet.”

The Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

Advice sought to halt planning hearing

OPPONENTS OF a meat and bonemeal incinerator proposed for Co Meath are to seek legal advice on securing an injunction preventing Bord Pleanála from proceeding next week with an oral hearing into the development.

The hearing into objections to the plans by rendering company College Proteins to build an eight megawatt biomass incinerator and ash landfill at its existing plant in Nobber, Co Meath, is expected to take at least two weeks. It is being assessed by the board under the Strategic Infrastructure Act.

The company says two megawatts would be used for its own operations and the balance would be exported to the national electricity grid. The power available for distribution to the grid represented the electricity demand of 4,000 homes.

There is much local opposition to the incinerator. The campaign group says it has health and environmental concerns and needs more time to prepare its expert witnesses.

At yesterday's preliminary hearing the inspector was told by Christy O'Reilly, chairman of North East Against Incineration, that more time was needed.

He said this was illustrated by the number of documents which were brought to the hearing yesterday by An Bord Pleanála that the group had not seen. "Our experts need time to examine the documents", he said.

Asking the inspector to consider adjourning the hearing, the group said a number of people who had made valid submissions to the board were not notified about the hearing.

Mr O'Reilly said the decision not to postpone the hearing meant these people were being denied their statutory right.

The inspector was also told the notice informing people of yesterday's preliminary hearing, where observers had to attend to ensure they could make submissions at the hearing, was sent when a lot of families were on holidays and some did not know about it.

Local councillor Eugene Cassidy said while the planning board had written to seven local authorities advising them they could make submissions, this was done two weeks ago.

He said because no council meetings were held in August, no submissions could be ratified.

The inspector Pauline Fitzpatrick said the hearing would not be postponed and she referred to the Strategic Infrastructure Act which by law requires the board to make a decision within 18 weeks of the closing date for submissions.

Meath deputy Shane McEntee said he did not accept that.The board did not have its house in order and it was not the problem of the people of north Meath if this was the case.

Meanwhile, the executive of Meath County Council in its submission said it had no objection in principle to the proposed development. It added, however, that the hearing would be told that elected members to the council might be taking a different view.

The formal hearing gets under way in Navan next Tuesday unless delayed or blocked by legal action.

The Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

Proposed Rathcoole incinerator slammed as 'dangerous' to health and environment

An incinerator proposed for Rathcoole in Co Dublin would pose a serious risk to the health of locals and to the environment, according to an Irish scientist.

Joe McCarthy, a phys­icist and qualified engineer from Sandymount in Dublin, says the new plant mooted for Rathcoole would be larger than the controversial Rings­end incinerator.

The company behind the proposed plant, Energy Ans­wers International (EAI), have based its design on a similar facility in the US which went on fire after an explosion last year.

EAI lodged an application for planning permission for the €200m thermal waste treatment plant at Behan's Quarry in Rathcoole near the N7 with An Bord Pleanála in May. EAI says the plant is the first of its kind in Ireland and will thermally treat 365,000 tonnes of non-hazard­ous municipal solid waste yearly.

Joe McCarthy, who has also campaigned again­st the Rings­end proposal, pointed out the Rath­coole incinerator would have the capacity to burn up to 730,000 tonnes of waste a year because EAI will build two incineration processing lines, each with a 365,000-tonne capability. EAI's environmental impact statement says they will only use one of the units at any one time. "I have no doubt in my mind that they will use both processing lines. They give no commercial reason why they have a fully redundant design," McCarthy said.

On 31 March 2007, an incinerator originally designed and built by EAI in Rochester, Mass­achusetts, caught fire after an explosion at the plant. The blaze took over 24 hours to extinguish. McCarthy said since the plant in Rochester open­ed in 1989 it has "consistently" exceeded accept­able EU levels for the emission of pollutants. "The incinerator will produce an enormous amount of particulate matter. This is tiny dust including dioxins and other harmful material but the particulate matter is more dangerous [to human health] than dioxins."

He also says the main chimney from the incinerator is not high enough to effectively disperse pollutants and could be a health hazard for some nearby residents.

EAI saya the plant would operate within the standards set down by the Environmental Protection Agency and the EU. "We have never exceeded the US levels accept­able for dioxins. Our history has been that we have met EU levels," he said. "We will absolutely meet EU standards and there won't be any violations of the standards here.

"I haven't seen any evidence... of any human health impact or deaths due to the combustion of waste." McCarthy added that the company had submitted a sophisticated model for the main chimneystack to the EPA, which takes into account "the topography of the land and the amount of material coming out of the stack".

The final decision by An Bord Pleanála on the facility is expected by the end of the year.

Sunday Tribune

www.buckplanning.ie

Leading trainer says €200m incinerator will harm thoroughbreds

A CHAMPION racehorse trainer has said he is confident a planning application by a US company to build an incinerator will be rejected.

Ted Walsh, who trained English Grand National winner Papillion, has said the incinerator "makes no sense whatsoever". Energy Answers International (EAI) is seeking permission to build the €200m waste facility in an old quarry off the N7 at Rathcoole, Co Dublin.

If it goes ahead, it will handle 365,000 tonnes of waste annually. But Mr Walsh has expressed serious concern for the welfare of racehorses in Co Kildare if the plans go ahead. "Horses are very susceptible to all things. Punchestown and Naas racecourses are just up the road. We have Goffs and there are 25 stud farms within seven or eight miles of the site -- it would definitely make life very difficult for us."

Mr Walsh is hopeful that An Bord Pleanala will consider the objections of the equine industry to the massive incinerator. "I think An Bord Pleanala do things pretty well and they have to hear every application as part of due course." Labour TD Emmet Stagg has lodged an objection with the planning board against the incinerator.

In his objection he highlighted how the former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern told the Dail that the overall requirement nationally for incineration was in the order of 400,000 tonne per annum in the next seven years and that "in the eastern region at present capacity was double that with 800,000 tonnes provided for in Carnstown in Co Meath and at Poolbeg".

Mr Stagg also said the scale of the furnace would lead to "substantial emissions" close to residents living nearby. "These toxic emissions will pose an unacceptable risk to people and there is no safe threshold for carcinogenic emissions."

He outlined other concerns on increased traffic and of the impact an incinerator would have on the equine industry in Co Kildare.

"There are eight stud farms and horse training facilities in Co Kildare within 5km of the proposed incinerator.

The incinerator would seriously damage the environment of these facilities and would be incompatible development, similar to the recent proposal at Coolmore."

Eimear Ni Bhraonain

www.buckplanning.ie

Incinerator plan raises pollution and traffic fears

AN INCINERATOR which is proposed for the Rathcoole area of south Co Dublin has become the subject of significant protest and criticism among local residents.

An application was lodged with An Bord Pleanála last May by a US company, Energy Answers International.

It is seeking permission to construct the facility at a place known locally as Behan's Quarry, close to the main Naas Road/N7 motorway.

The planning application comes under the Strategic Infrastructure Bill 2006 which enables the fast-tracking of planning applications for projects deemed to be of a particular infrastructural significance, and as such bypasses any requirement to go through the local council's planning procedure.

The proposal has met with criticism from South Dublin County Council, and was strongly opposed at last week's council meeting, according to Cllr John Hannon (FF), who said there was a broad cross-party objection to the proposal.

Martin Judge from the council's planning department said they have undertaken a study of the likely effects of the incinerator, and the subsequent report unequivocally advised against any support for such a facility.

He said "the council has submitted objections to the planning application on the basis that the proposal does not comply with the Dublin regional waste management plan, and also because of concerns over the expected traffic problems which will be generated by the facility".

Local objections in Rathcoole are being led by a group called Rathcoole Against Incinerator Dioxins (Raid), which has held a series of public meetings in the area in the past few weeks.

Liam McDermott, secretary of Raid, said "our information is that the emissions likely to come out of this facility represent a danger to thousands of people in the surrounding area when the prevailing wind distributes them".

He said "the local environment for miles around will be polluted consistently for years".

"It should be considered that this area includes an equine industry worth in excess of €1 billion per year, as well as the Poulaphouca reservoir which in only six miles away from the site," he said.

Ted Walsh, one of the leading horse trainers in Ireland, has his business located within four miles of the proposed incinerator site, and has also objected strongly to the planning application.

He said an incinerator in that location, with the winds blowing in every direction, is likely to spread ash across the countryside and affect the quality of grazing for horses.

"Obviously, the effects on people is the most important thing, but Kildare is a great county for horses, with studs and farms that have produced Grand National and Gold Cup winners, and to have something like this built a few miles up the road would be a disaster."

Gerry O'Sullivan of Energy Answers International said the proposed facility was of huge importance and "would be capable of handling 365,000 tonnes of residual municipal waste per year, and would produce enough energy to power over 43,000 homes in the Dublin area".

He said Energy Answers International believed there was no basis to concerns over a significant increase in traffic in the area.

"The facility would be constructed within the quarry site, selected as the most appropriate location because it is close to existing waste-management infrastructure and transport routes," he said.

"It will have a dedicated exit from the N7, and as far as we are concerned there are no significant implications for local traffic in the area."

Mr O'Sullivan said "Energy Answers International has an open office on this matter, and is happy to discuss the matter and allay any concerns".

Tomorrow is the last day for objections to the planning permission application with An Bord Pleanála.

A final decision is expected towards the end of this year.

The Irish Times

www.buckplanning.ie

Meath incinerator plan sparks local anger over health worries

A CROWD estimated at 400 marched to the entrance of north Meath rendering company College Proteins yesterday in protest at its plans to build an eight-megawatt biomass combined heat-and-power plant at Nobber, Co Meath.

The power would be generated through the incineration and the firm says two megawatts would be used for its own operations and the balance would be exported to the national electricity grid.

There is much local opposition to the incinerator. The campaign group ran adverts on local radio this week calling on people to join in the march.

Local MEP Mairéad McGuinness told the crowd she believed efforts were under way to "reclassify incineration as a form of recycling because energy can be got from it".

She said it was an issue "the Greens were strong on but are weak on now in Government".

Among the protesters was local GP Dr Martin Whyte, who said: "I spend my working days and professional life trying to maintain good health and promoting good health and this would be a retrograde step."

He claims it would result in "toxic emissions including dioxins which are the most toxic chemicals one can breathe. There will also be fine particles emitted. This will particularly affect people with chronic respiratory and cardiovascular problems as well as pregnant women and newborns."

He did not accept that incinerators built to the highest standards would be safe. "All incinerators release emissions and pollute to a level. In Ireland the Health Research Board said five years ago that it did not have the expertise or resources to monitor the health of the population in the vicinity of incinerators. I don't believe that has changed."

An Bord Pleanála has said the project falls under the scope of the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act, 2006, which means the firm must apply to it for planning permission.

Chief executive of College Proteins John Gilroy said: "We have engaged a team of expert consultants to prepare the plans for this exciting development. We are committed to a policy of full and open consultation with our neighbours and with the various regulatory agencies and other stakeholders."

He said the power plant would replace fossil fuel-generated electricity with biomass carbon-neutral fuels, and would cut carbon emissions equivalent to taking 20,000 cars off the road.

The reduction in emissions would equate to 1 per cent of the national carbon emissions reduction target as set out in the Kyoto Protocol, for Ireland."

A municipal waste incinerator is also due to be built in Carranstown, south Meath, and Fine Gael TD Shane McEntee who lives in Nobber said: "Meath is in danger of becoming the dumping ground for Dublin's waste and waste from the surrounding counties."

ELAINE KEOGH
The Irish Times

Waste incinerator proposals rejected by planning board

A LARGE waste incineration plant which was proposed for Co Monaghan has been rejected by the Planning Appeals Board.

An Bord Pleanala refused to give the go-ahead for the controversial €50m plant which was set to be constructed near the small village of Emyvale, in Co Monaghan, close to the Tyrone border. The plan had previously been rejected by Monaghan County Council after residents protested over having the incinerator in their local area.

The company involved, Monopower Limited, is now expected to challenge the decision in the High Court.

Irish Independent

Incinerator will cost public ‘up to €33m a year’

CARBON dioxide emissions from a planned incinerator on Dublin Bay will cost the taxpayer up to €33 million annually, it was claimed yesterday.

At the final day of oral hearings at An Bord Pleanála’s headquarters on the planned incinerator at Poolbeg, an expert warned of potential financial, environmental and health costs.

Local resident and scientist Joe McCarthy objected to the 15-acre incinerator site, criticising submissions by its planned operators, Dublin City Council.

He said the projected output of three quarters of a million tonnes of CO2 annually would leave a bill of between €13.3m and €33.35m to foot the planned carbon credits under the environmental Kyoto Pact.

In addition, Mr McCarthy told inspector Padraic Thornton hearing the case that landfill was a better option to dispose of Dublin’s waste.

Using incineration would be six times worse for carbon emissions than landfill, the hearing heard. Over 25 years, the incinerator would produce 17.3 million tonnes of CO2, while landfill would only result in 3 million, said Mr McCarthy.

Submissions by DCC’s own expert witness Dr Edward Porter were “confusing” and his theories on the Poolbeg site were also inconsistent with international research, claimed Mr McCarthy.

But DCC disagreed and stood over its claim the planned waste disposal facility is better from a climate perspective than landfilling alone or landfilling combined with anaerobic digestion.

Both Dr Porter and Mr McCarthy disagreed fundamentally on the make-up of the carbon emissions and the electricity credit or production from the incinerator.

The planned opening of the incinerator is 2012. It could handle up to 600,000 tonnes of household and non-hazardous waste, taking in 25% of the city’s refuse.

Speaking after the hearing, the objecting scientist added: “Two thirds of a million tonnes of carbon dioxide every year, that’s a huge impact on the current climate problem. But also the issue of health. It will spew out 1,000 different compounds but we won’t know what they are because it’s whatever you put in your bin.”

On top of the carbon credit emission costs, the transport of rubbish to the incinerator is expected to cost €88 a tonne, say objecting residents in Ringsend and Irishtown, who have warned of inevitable traffic chaos.

“Incineration costs more than landfill and it’s worse for the environment, and it has a terrible effect on your health,” claimed the expert.

Officials with An Bord Pleanála say it will take some time to consider the nearly 3,000 objections made about the incinerator and expect a decision to be announced in the autumn.

Irish Examiner

Final appeal against incinerator plant fails

Local campaigner claimed planning permission invalid

THE Supreme Court has dismissed a challenge to the granting of planning permission for an incinerator/waste management facility near Duleek in Co Meath.

The three-judge court unanimously rejected an appeal yesterday by local campaigner Eric Martin against the High Court's refusal to uphold his claim that the permission granted by An Bord Pleanala was invalid.

Mr Martin had claimed a European Directive relating to environment impact assessments had not been properly implemented into Irish law.

His claims were denied by the State, An Bord Pleanala and Indaver Ireland, developer of the proposed incinerator.

Impact

At the time, Mr Justice Thomas Smyth also asked the Supreme Court to decide on a point of law in the case on whether the State had implemented a European directive relating to environment impact statements into Irish law.

However, Indaver have warned there is still uncertainty over the Carranstown project, despite the outcome of the case, blaming the Government's failure to curb development of landfill.

The company said there was a need to increase landfill levies to ensure competition in the waste market. There would also have to be a ban on certain types of waste being disposed of in landfills.

Yesterday, Chief Justice John Murray, presiding at the Supreme Court, said Mr Martin was "clutching at straws" in his opposition to the decision made by An Bord Pleanala.

Dismissing the case, he said there was no need to refer the matter to the European Court of Justice.

The Supreme Court accepted the submissions of An Bord Pleanala and the State that the combination of the assessments carried out by the board and the Environment Protection Agency (EPA) together met the requirements of the EU Directive with regard to the Environment Impact Assessment prior to planning permission consent.

The 25-acre site of the proposed incinerator is about 3km from Duleek and 2km from Donore village.

Alliance

Mr Martin, of Newlanes, Duleek, is a retired production manager and a member of the No Incineration Alliance - a group of farmers, residents and business people who live near the proposed incinerator.

Meath County Council had, in 2002, granted permission for the development, subject to certain conditions, including that the facility would only accept waste which was generated and produced in the north-east region of counties Louth, Meath, Cavan and Monaghan.

Another condition was that annual tonnage for thermal treatment/recycling would not exceed 172,000 tonnes a year.

Indaver appealed that latter condition, while several people appealed the decision to grant permission. An Bord Pleanala held an oral hearing over four days after which its inspector recommended permission be refused.

But the board decided to grant permission.

Yesterday, Chief Justice Murray said on the basis of any reasonable view of the provision of the Directive alone, it seemed clear the contention of Mr Martin with regard to a global integrated assessment was unfounded.

The Chief Justice said the EU Directive was essentially procedural in nature.

Ann O'Loughlin
Irish Independent

European Commission to consider petition on Poolbeg incinerator site

Fiona Gartland in The Irish Times tells us that the European Commission is to hear a petition today on whether EU law was breached when the Poolbeg peninsula in Dublin was chosen as the site for a waste incinerator.
The case is being taken by Fianna Fáil councillor Chris Andrews, who believes the Government did not give proper consideration to a European directive that requires it to ensure waste is disposed of without endangering human health or the environment.
Mr Andrews contends that when former Dublin city manager John Fitzgerald commissioned a private consulting company to conduct a siting study in 1999, he in effect ordered the company to select the incinerator site.
By doing so, Mr Andrews said, councillors were denied their right to exercise control in the decision-making on the siting of the incinerator, and because of this, they could not ensure that the goals of the EU directive would be achieved.
In his petition to the commission, he said the Poolbeg peninsula and the surrounding residential areas of Ringsend, Sandymount and Irishtown were already subject to an "unacceptable degree of environmental pollution, accompanied by alarming noise levels and fierce odours due to industrial activity and severe traffic.
"In addition to these strains, the Dublin waste water treatment plant, which was opened on the Poolbeg peninsula in 2004 and was promised to be run at the highest of environmental and safety standards, has proven to have severe health and environmental implications," he said.
He called on the commission to ensure Ireland complied with its obligations under EU law.
Mr Andrews will be accompanied by representatives from the Combined Residents Against the Incinerator and the Ringsend-Sandymount Environmental Group at the hearing today.
The commission will then carry out its own investigation before making a decision.

Incinerator sites should be specified earlier, waste summit told

Irish Times:

Proposed sites for incinerators and other major infrastructure projects should be included in city and county development plans to allow public consultation on their location, the Irish Planning Institute has said.

Speaking at the National Waste Summit in Dublin yesterday, the president of the institute, Henk Van der Kamp, said the "fast-track" approach to planning contained in the recent Strategic Infrastructure Act should only be allowed if a project has been specified in a development plan which has gone through public consultation.

"Major waste projects, such as incinerators and landfills, are included in principle in waste management plans but their locations are not identified. Hence, when the projects are proposed, there is opposition since the local communities in these locations have had no input into the choice of sites."

This could be solved by requiring local authorities not only to make a general statement they intend to develop incineration as part of their waste management policies, but to specify preferred locations for such projects in their development plans.

"Local communities are often taken by surprise when a project is proposed in their local area, notwithstanding the fact that the general principle may have been included in the waste management plan or county development plan for the area."

Specifying locations in development plans would also benefit the local authorities or developers of the projects, as it would reduce planning delays due to appeals or rejection by An Bord Pleanála, said Mr Van der Kamp.

Several objections have been made to the planning board in relation to the proposed incinerator for Poolbeg in Dublin on the basis that the site is not mentioned in the Dublin City Development Plan.

Local authorities or the "delivering agencies" who were seeking to develop a project appeared not to anticipate the impact the waste management plan would have on their planning application.

A review of An Bord Pleanála's files showed that developments were sometimes refused because they conflicted with the provisions of the waste management plan.

Waste management plans could also affect proposed schemes by limiting the duration of planning permission for a facility, limiting the capacity or limiting the catchment area from which waste could be collected.