Protesters jubilant as incinerator plan goes up in smoke
CAMPAIGNERS opposing a proposed waste treatment plant cheered as councillors, citing health and traffic reasons, rejected the plans.
Resource Recovery Solutions had hoped to build the plant in Sinfin Lane, Sinfin, to deal with waste collected from across Derbyshire.
-
Protesters outside the Council House last night
Now those plans have taken a blow after the company was refused permission by Derby City Council's planning committee last night.
The committee had already been told it could not grant final planning permission without "special authorisation" from Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, John Denham.
But the committee voted to reject the application completely. RRS said it would now consider an appeal.
Environmental campaigners and local residents said they feared the emissions from the plant, which would have dealt with 180,000 tonnes of household waste a year, could be damaging to health.
Dozens of protesters gathered outside the Council House in Corporation Street before last night's meeting.
Simon Bacon, a member of Sinfin, Spondon Against Incineration (SSAIN), said he was pleased. Mr Bacon, 36, of Swarkestone Drive, said: "We are delighted with the result which was exactly what we wanted and the best thing for the city of Derby."
Councillor Baggy Shanker, who asked for the Secretary of State's intervention along with fellow Sinfin councillor Robin Turner and Derby South MP Margaret Beckett, said it was "a victory for democracy".
He said: "Our problem was the location. I think the council picked that spot because it was a cheap piece of land – it put profit before people."
In a scathing attack on the RRS application, planning committee member Philip Hickson said he believed the public would be exposed to danger if there was a leak or malfunction at the plant and that vehicles coming to and from the plant would cause traffic and pollution problems.
He added: "There is likely to be a threat of serious or irreversible environmental damage." The plant would have sorted or dried waste which would then be heated to produce a gas which would be burnt to produce electricity for 14,000 homes.
It would have formed part of a multi-million-pound contract which the city council and Derbyshire County Council had signed with RRS to deal with the county's waste for the next 27 years.
RRS communications manager Dan Walmsley said the firm would now look at the council's reasons for refusal and would consider its options – including an appeal.
Last night Mike Carr, cabinet member for direct and internal services, said he could not reveal the value of the contract as it was commercially sensitive.
12 Comments
View all
by Judge, Derby
Friday, December 18 2009, 3:25PM
“Derby has a reputation for having some of the best engineers in the World...
''NEI: International Combustion'' (ex Sinfin Lane) used to design and build powerstations, and there must be a few of the old guys around somewhere?!?
If we can't sort the fine particulate problem, which is the main issue with these plants, who can?
I'd suggest charging the exhaust gases, so the really fine particles can be filtered electrically...
Might work?!?
Could call it ''The Derby Scrubber''... ;)”
by David, Derby
Friday, December 18 2009, 2:58PM
“There are some very good comments on here, Yes we do need to deal with the waste we produce, yes putting it into the ground is the wrong thing to do but don't people think that a facility like this shouldn't be put into a city, near residential areas. Is burning it the right thing to do? That releases all the toxic gasses, has waste in the form of toxic ash that is then landfilled, so it is still contributing to the problems that it is supposed to be alleviating.
I think that we need to tackle the waste problem at its core, by having more packaging that is recyclable and also less packaging in total. More products recycled and also educating people into recycling or composting more.
Then if plants like these are needed then we can put them in areas away from population. Better processes in dealing with the waste and the such.
Studies have shown that people living under the emmisions of these plants are more likely to have mis-carraiges and people are more likely to die younger. Add this to the polution created by the lorrys that are bringing the waste to the facility, on an already over capacity road, and pollution hotspot is not the wisest idea.
I think if the facility was in the Right Place then It may be a benifit to the waste issues we currently are dealing with.
Well I've had my little rant now oh and I'm not a tree hugger if anyone is wondering”
by Andy, Derby
Friday, December 18 2009, 2:27PM
“Its all very well celbrating this alleged 'victory' however, those who have campaigned against this plant (wherever it is built) must consider what the REAL problem is - WE ALL PRODUCE TOO MUCH WASTE!! We also can't keep throwing in the ground. How many have consider what damage a leaking landfill site does to the environment and the water supply.
I have seen some of the protesters against this plant have a cigarette whilst holding their placards up. Don't they realise that their habit will catch up with their health long before any emissions from a mordern incinerator will?
Common sense must soon prevail over the whole waste issue, and the council burying its head in the ground and passing the buck for responsible planning decisions won't tackle the problems anytime soon.
Everyone should take time to consider where all their leftover rubbish from the festive period is going to go - and the tree huggers should consider which forest all the wrapping paper and cardboard packaging came from and how many chemical were used for the contents!!”
by di, derby
Friday, December 18 2009, 1:10PM
“Having followed the argument about emissions and increased traffic, I can understand that only the very best design of energy from waste plant in an easy access place should be granted permission. However the protestors don't seem able to realise that we need to stop putting rubbish in landfill and that many countries (greener than ours) have such plants.
I try not to buy things unnecessary packaging or things I don't need, I recycle and compost but I do have a bag of rubbish every week from a family of five - landfill or energy?”
by RamFanGazMan, Spondon
Friday, December 18 2009, 12:08PM
“I'm not being funny, but a councilor saying that he's worried "there might be a leak in the future" isn't a very good reason to reject it!
Now, i'm being honest, I don't know a great deal about this but I question whether or not the people protesting know any more? Im sure that it would have been invironmentally friendly as otherwise why would they have gone through the effort of submitting for planning.
Plus, it would have created jobs, an alternative to fossil fuells for creating energy, an alternative to landfill for waste and also, I actually think that the design was architectually attractive, especially considering that it'll be neighbors to Severn Trent and Accordis!
Like I say, i don't know all the facts, but would love to actually hear some, either in favour or against the project!!!!!
(PS i mean facts, and not some eco nut jumping on the bandwaggon, like i already said, the alternative is to burn fossil fuels and landfill the waste)”