fair points

Report abuse

i wish we could recycle plastic in shrewsbury that would make a massive difference for me

Report abuse

even in north shropshire we will be getting the fumes from this thing, im ashamed that we cant sort our own waste locally and have to rely on shipping it to shrewsbury for burning, we should all be more self sufficient, its starts at home, with your shopping habits and things like composting, we shouldnt rely on nearby towns having all that pollution just to get rid of our trash, as someone down wind of it, i’ll be making a formal planning complaint and if that dont work im going to get radical and protest outside and everything, we have to stop this monster from sending dust and fumes all over our communities

Report abuse

design: With a building 27 metres/100 feet in height and a chimney height of 65
metres/200 feet; it will have a huge visual impact on the neighbourhood. Veolia’s pictures are all
aerial views, and do not depict the actual size of the building as you will see it from the ground. In the
Planning Application the photomontages have mostly been carefully taken from places where other
buildings shield the full impact. As you can see from our cover picture of the Chineham incinerator,
which used the same designer, nothing can disguise the ugliness and huge size of this proposed
facility.

Report abuse

but it is the County Council who voted this in TB? You must be aware that this was chosen by the politians and could be stopped by them too. The national government has had nothing to do with this specific choice of technology, they have just asked councils to landfill less, some are choosing sustainable recycling options, some are choosing to burn.

The choice lies with the polititians on the Council…

Report abuse

NIMBYs the lot of you! What gives you the right to have a say in your local environment?

Report abuse

the recycling service is not bad in shrewsbury really but i agree alot of improvements are needed especially plastics

Report abuse

on the other page there it says Powys next door is aiming for 70 % recycling!! why cant we do that in Shropshire, i thought we wanted to be green, recycling is safer, cleaner, cheaper and greener than burning our waste. If Shropshire aims for 70% recycling that would leave only a tiny amount of waste which could be economically disposed of or sent to some of the increasing number of green alternative processes like Anaerobic Digestion and Autoclaving or MBT which is what they do in Germany

Report abuse

Zak (#10), I disagree.

And I encourage other people to speak out and get active.

Nothing is futile.

Every small action creates another one.

We are enormously lucky to be living in a democracy.

Let’s use it.

Report abuse

i dont beleive it, i thought that the Council was trying to reduce carbon emissions in line with government policy, this machine will burn rubbish which as we all know is predominantly plastics, therefore its second hand oil, so its fossil fuel adding CO2 to the atmosphere is as we know deadly, it will make hundreds of people in Shrewsbury homeless when climate change causes higher winter rainfall in the welsh hills and of cause combustion products like particulate matter of less than 10 microns which can kill by getting deep into the inner lung

Report abuse

im glad our MP is against this dirty polluting idea, he’s got my vote for that, as the rest of the blog say though thats they way to stop this thing, get people like Daniel onto the Council and into government, they support the peoples power the peoples right to say NO! You must ask all your councillors in the election are they for or against incineration? if they support this dirty dangerous machine, simple vote against them and get a Council who do what we tell them, we pay their wages after all…

Report abuse

where im from in sweden we burn alot in the municipal incinerator to heat the swimming pool, but we also recycle alot, you can do both, and dont tell me that recycling alone will solve the landfill crisis in this country, you need alot of recycling i agree, its a great thing for the planet and all that, and shropshire council run an inadequate, unpopular and insufficient recycling scheme, i agree, BUT…. Even if they raise there game there will still be thousands of tonnes of rubbish left over, and you have to do something with it now, you cannot morally or legally or financially just keep burying it. You need waste treatment in Shropshire and its always going to involve some kind of thermal process, be it combustion or cleaner options or what ever, you should be efficient and make it the best incinerator you can get, an efficient one, a CHp one where you use the heat too, but you cannot say thats not good for the planet, compared to coal fired power stations, you just can do without it, not just with recycling alone, no way, you need more than just a good recycling collection, you need to process the left overs too

Report abuse

i think the headline is bang on, says it all, green hopes are ashes, they have just destroyed any green dreams of high recycling rates and new expanded recycling services – from here on in, its down hill for recycling, they will just focus on feeding the greedy beast, burning everything to get high value (subsidised by the tax payer) electricity

Report abuse

i think incineration is inherantly dangerous for health and the world health organisation agree with me on that one and its also not actually doing anything useful to the waste is it, if you understand the laws of thermodynamics you know that ‘matter cannot be created OR DESTROYED’ so literally this furnace is just taking solid waste and turning it into gaseous waste, there is no loss of matter, instead of nappies, apple cores, snotty tissues, discarded matresses and plastic bags, i give you (abra cadabra) a magical transformation into soot, ash, dust, particulate matter, nitrogen dioxide, CO2 and really really nasty (offically HAZARDOUS waste) known as fly ash which has to go to special landfill sites.

And guess what else the laws of thermodynamics teach us… ENERGY that cant be created nor destroyed either. so all these wonderful claims of electricity ‘too cheap to meter’ you know the stuff we subsidise through “renewable”?! tarrifs – thats not new stuff either, really there is energy contained within the waste itself, often the calorific value relates to the fact that the material is derived from fossil fuel, ie plastics from oil, you can save more energy than incineration “creates” via re-use and recycling, infact significantly more.

So in conclusion, from the perspective of energy and waste, its best to turn this planning application down and instead opt for more environmentally sustainable options, like mechanical reclaimation of recyclates from the waste stream followed by washing and composting of the organic fraction and soluable organic matter.

Report abuse

im not strongly for or aganist, im undecided (on the case for the incinerator) but one thing i agree for sure, the recycling services in north shropshire are lousy, unreliable, no plastics, inconvenient, you have to sort it all out and carry the boxes around, its a pain, in other areas they collect it all together and sort it out for you, this is a much superior system for the resident more convenient and safer and cleaner too

Report abuse

we can still stop this incinerator – there are elections in June and those elected people need to give it planning permission, vote and you can have the power to decide what happens in your town

Report abuse

Why arent we getting the Best Practical Environmental Option? The Waste Local Plan says we will get the BPEO and sepcifically rules out incineration at the Battlefield site. I see no evidence of a BPEO assessment done here. If they had incineration would have been ruled out because of its environmental, health, and toxicology implicatons.

It is not ecological to burn rubbish because burning anything gives of fumes which harm people and wildlife, im particularly concerned here that the nitrogen oxides emitting from burning would acidify and eutrophy wetlands in north shrewsbury which are an important home for BAP species such as Great Crested Newts which are protected by law, so in theory, this should not be allowed because clearly it will harm protected species, also the people of harlescott and around will suffer health impacts from dioxins and particulates

Report abuse

who cares about the environmental side of things, really be honest, the most important this is the economics of the thing. If its cheaper than recycling then burn it instead, this is called ‘economics’ its what smart people do to get rich

Report abuse

the crux of this letter is that incineration is unneccessary because we could recycle much of our rubbish, whilst this is honerable, desirable and nice in theory i think its idealistic, the maximum possible recycling is 70% even in Flanders and no more can be done economically, so there is a residue and it must be either landfilled, sterilised and then landfilled, burned and then landfilled or pyrolised (turned to glass) and then landfilled, zero waste is a myth, i think the county council has let a contract with too low recycling targets and they should aim for 70% BUT i dont agree with h spencers letter that recycling alone is enough to deal with all the waste, we must also landfill/landraise the residues

Report abuse

not sure about burning but the letter does make a good point about how relatively poor our recycling services are in Shropshire. my mum lives in Congelton in Cheshire and they collect something like ten different materials there! Where I live in Brosely, we get 3!! I think they should spend less on the back office beaurocracy and expensive treatment solutions and more on the basics, i.e. the actual collection service

Report abuse

this is an EU thing, we must get rid of Labour if we are to get out of the EU, then we can have weekly rubbish collections and have local democratic control over things like this, not a one size fits all approach from whitehall/brussels

Report abuse

In a House of Lords enquiry on 14th April 1999, the then Environment Minister Michael Meacher said,
“Incinerator plants are the source of serious toxic pollutants: dioxins; furans; acid gases; particulates; heavy metals; and they all need to be treated very seriously. There must be absolute prioritisation given to human health requirements and protection of the environment. I repeat the emissions from incinerator processes are extremely toxic. Some of the emissions are carcinogenic We must use every reasonable instrument to eliminate them altogether”.

Is he a crank? Is he lying? He was the Environment Secretary, for peats sake! Why are we still looking at burning rubbish when we know its dangerous for health!

Report abuse

you lot who beleive in democracy are misplaced, its going ahead, the planning is just rubber stamping, you are blind in your faith and its silly, you should know better

Report abuse

well said h spencer, i totally agree

Report abuse

ive got kids so i dont want another legacy of conaminated land and i know kids are especially suseptable to asthma and things from combustion processes, so im against the burner

Report abuse

i have love for what you guys call MBT, i am an engineer, so i hope i know to speak on this debate, your better with MBT because the processed fuel burns cleaner than with mass burn incineration

Report abuse

i have no faith in the planning or the democartic system, because how can you expect them to make a neutral choice, they are applying for planning permission to THEMSELVES!

Report abuse

i just cant imagine any right minded councillor would have approved this

this is elcctoral suicide surely

i would like to see what process of approval this went through democratically speaking, because it is very technical and its an ever changing field -were these people given the correct information, we all know this year some councils are reporting a 10% reduction in waste collected, and as the recession goes on this will continue, therefore the need is not there. I also dont think the people of shrewsbury have had a say, we need a referendum on this issue.

no one wants an incinerator in this charming medieval town, why in this modern age of every increasing obestity, asthma and cancer would anyone want to have heavy industry in our town?

Report abuse

does any one really care about the environment any more – i think the recession is more important now

Report abuse