Incinerator at Belvedere granted permission.

  • http://www.qualifiedinquality.co.uk/

Over Easter the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy took the decision to approve the development of a second mass waste incinerator at Belvedere. Jon Cruddas MP who launched a campaign against the proposals back in 2018, making official representations and raising a petition of over 2000 local signatories has said: “We knew going into this fight that waste incineration has more than doubled under the Tories, it was always going to be an uphill struggle.”

Early in the campaign Jon Cruddas highlighted that waste incineration doesn’t have to be a bad means of energy production, as it is a low carbon process which disposes of plastic when it can no longer be recycled. However, the current Riverside Energy Plant produces ten times more harmful emissions than other facilities considered as best practice.

Records highlight that in 2017 the plant at Belvedere produced the second highest concentration of harmful emissions anywhere in the country, and since then every analysis has shown that Rainham and South Hornchurch are taking the brunt of this due to the prevailing wind direction.

Jon explained: “The waste incineration directives on maximum output are calculated all wrong and Cory are taking advantage of the loopholes. An individual facility isn’t allowed to produce more than 200 milligrams per cubic metre of Nitrous Oxide but, if you have two facilities that produce 170 and 120 next to each other it is perfectly legal. That’s what we have here, and it means my constituency takes a double hit of air pollution.”

In an earlier contribution to the examination an analysis by the Greater London Authority explained that incineration of solid waste can lead to emissions of toxic heavy metals and other substances that are detrimental to human health and biodiversity. Based on output projections these impacts would be widespread across the Rainham area.

The Secretary of State’s letter outlines that: “The overall conclusion is that the impacts of the development on air quality as it affects human health and environmental receptors is acceptable.”

Jon added: “The fight isn’t over. We now have six weeks to challenge the decision and I will be seeking advice from the Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. I will also be speaking with legal professionals to see what routes might be available to us.”

One thought on “Incinerator at Belvedere granted permission.

  • 25th April 2020 at 6:41 pm
    Permalink

    If the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy made any inquiries about the possible health effect of emissions from incinerators, he’d probably have been told of the SASHU study, which concluded no link between incinerator emissions and infant mortality.

    https://airqualitynews.com/2018/11/26/incinerator-emissions-not-linked-to-infant-mortality/

    After a series of critical articles by Mark Metcalf in Big Issue in the North, the HPA promised a study into a possible link between incinerator emissions and infant mortality in 2011, which was carried out by SAHSU and published over seven years later. After adjusting ONS infant mortality data for deprivation, ethnicity and socioeconomic status, the authors concluded that there was no risk.

    https://markwritecouk.files.wordpress.com/2020/03/allincinerators.pdf

    For the SAHSU rationale to hold, there’d have to have been major population shifts before and after incinerators started operating, with “the poor etc” leaving prior to the start-up to “explain” the then falling infant death rates and sudden returns after incinerators started operating to account for the rise in rates of baby deaths. These very location-specific and time-critical population shifts just didn’t occur at council level, which SAHSU and other experts should have realised before submitting a flawed and misleading study for publication.

    If Mr Cruddas looks at my November 2017 submission to the EFRA committee, he’ll see that the truth about the air pollution link with infant mortality has been long known to successive governments who have always ignored the data, preferring to blame poverty for high rates of infant deaths.

    http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/environment-food-and-rural-affairs-committee/joint-inquiry-into-improving-air-quality/written/73685.pdf

    Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: