Norwich city council wrote a letter to Environment Secretary Caroline Spelman yesterday (January 9) highlighting its opposition to any form of incineration.
Cllr Brenda Arthur
Mrs Spelman is currently considering whether or not to release 169 million of PFI credits to the project, which would see an energy-from-waste plant developed by a consortium of Cory and Wheelabrator at a site in Kings Lynn (see letsrecycle.com story). Although the credits have been allocated to Norfolk and approved by the Treasury, Mrs Spelman is considering whether the plans have broad consensus, in line with strict PFI criteria.
Norwich represents the second council in Norfolk to oppose the incinerator plans, after the borough council of Kings Lynn and West Norfolk where the proposed EfW plant would be located – withdrew its support in summer 2011.
Opposed
In the letter, Norwich council leader Brenda Arthur referred to Norwich city councils position on the disposal of residual waste by quoting a resolution from January 2007: This council is opposed to any form of waste treatment that involves incineration. This includes a full-blown incinerator but also any other form of treatment involving burning.
Addressing Mrs Spelman directly, Cllr Arthur added: I am sure you will take into account the position of this council in your deliberations.
Commenting on the move, local anti-incineration campaigner and environmental management consultant Richard Burton claimed that the Norfolk EfW project was now in breach of PFI rules which demand broad consensus in favour of a project and two-tier local authority support.
He said: With clear opposition from both the council that would host the incinerator (West Norfolk) and the council that takes County Halls own waste (Norwich), it would now indeed represent a tearing up of the PFI rules should the Secretary of State release the credits.
Support
However, Bill Borrett, Conservative cabinet member for environment and waste at Norfolk county council, told letsrecycle.com that the project still had broad consensus because the majority of people in Norfolk and district councils supported it including Breckland district council, Broadland district council, Great Yarmouth borough council, South Norfolk council and North Norfolk district council. He added that when Norfolk agreed to award the 500 million, 25-year contract to build the EfW plant to the Cory/Wheelabrator consortium in March 2011, all the district councils in Norfolk supported it.
Cllr Borrettsaid that Brenda Arthur was the leader of a minority Labour administration at Norwich city council which was under political pressure to get Green Party council members on side. He pointed out that Norwich had signed up to the Norfolk Waste Strategy under which the contract was procured and was also a member of the Norfolk Waste Partnership.
He said: Brenda Arthur attended the last meeting of the Norfolk Waste Partnership on December 19th and said nothing about not being committed to the partnership.
He said: I wouldnt have thought this could sabotage the project as it is five to six years old and when assessed by Defra we fulfilled all the PFI criteria. Anti-incinerator campaigners are just playing this for all it is worth.
Cllr Borrett said he did not know when Mrs Spelman would make a decision over whether or not to release the PFI credits, despite suggestions that a decision might be imminent. He said: I havent been told when a decision will be made, but we have not been asked to submit any more information to Defra.
Full text of Norwich city council letter:
Dear Ms Spelman,
Funding Proposal from Norfolk County Council Energy from Waste
I refer to your current consideration of the proposal from Norfolk County Council for funding for an energy from waste plant. As you already know Norwich City Councils position on the disposal of residual waste has been in the public domain since January 2007. This position has not changed in the intervening years. For clarity full council resolved on 30th January 2007 as follows:-
This Council confirms its opposition to any form of incineration of Norfolk’s waste. Key concerns include:
(1) the effect of emissions on human health and the environment;
(2) the fact that incineration contracts with private companies create a demand for waste, when the primary objective must be to reduce the amount of it that is produced.
This Council is opposed to any form of waste treatment that involves incineration. This includes a full-blown incinerator but also any other form of treatment involving burning (such as forms of Mechanical Biological Treatment that produce Refuse Derived Fuel for burning) as the concerns expressed above apply in each case.
This Council believes that a combination of comprehensive doorstep local facilities and a resource recovery park is the only sustainable way to significantly reduce the amount of waste sent to landfill. If further treatment of residual waste is absolutely necessary, a network of small anaerobic digestion plants should be pursued.
Furthermore, this Council calls upon the Government to introduce legislation to reduce waste at source by strict regulation and taxes on packaging.
This Council welcomes the news that incineration is likely to no longer be the County Council’s preferred option for residual waste treatment but is concerned that it remains the reserve option. This Council resolves to ask Executive members and senior officers to lobby County Council Cabinet members and officers (and Councillors and officers from other Norfolk districts) to rule out incineration and pursue the favoured policy outlined above.
I am sure you will take into account the position of this council in your current deliberations.
Cllr Brenda Arthur
Leader of the Council
Register for free to comment