PODCAST: All you need to know about the incinerator debate

The proposed incinerator site at Saddlebow. Picture: Ian Burt. The proposed incinerator site at Saddlebow. Picture: Ian Burt.

David Powles
Monday, April 7, 2014
8:11 AM

One of the biggest controversies in Norfolk in recent years could draw to a conclusion on Monday when councillors meet to vote on whether to scrap plans for an incinerator in King’s Lynn.

To send a link to this page to a friend, you must be logged in.

Norfolk County Council officers have recommended that members of the full council vote for such a move to happen, which would be to the delight of those who have fought against it.

Ahead of the meeting, Dan Grimmer, public affairs correspondent, talks to David Powles, digital editor, about the saga.

• Conservative councillors told to stay away unless they intend to back controversial incinerator plan

• EDP comment: Do the right thing - Crunch time comes for the fate of unpopular incinerator

9 comments

  • Brian. Eric Pickles office will be listening to the meeting tomorrow on EDP24 Twitter. The pro-lobby need to move with the times and realise recycling rates have increased and will disadvantage counties opting for burn and bankrupt technology.

    Report this comment

    NCIS

    Sunday, April 6, 2014

  • When the Incinerator issue is finally terminated, will the ratepayers of Norfolk be given the reasons why the Council's legal advisers advocated entering into a contract with such onerous penalty clauses ?

    Report this comment

    john lillburn

    Friday, April 4, 2014

  • When the Incinerator issue is finally terminated, will the ratepayers of Norfolk be given the reasons why the Council's legal advisers advocated entering into a contract with such onerous penalty clauses ?

    Report this comment

    john lillburn

    Friday, April 4, 2014

  • Many councillors have fell into the trap of old pals act or cronyism and do not want to rock the boat or lose face. Strong willed councillors can do deals behind closed doors sealed with a few Gin and Tonics and a formality to vote at county hall. How many meetings have you been to and many councillors do not know what day it is, or sleep through proceedings to be woken up and reminded to support or reject. The benefit of this for inexperienced lazy or inexperienced councillors, you do not have to tax your brain by reading the planning application and benefit of being paid handsomely for attending a meeting.

    Report this comment

    wattonlad

    Sunday, April 6, 2014

  • Brian and NCIS.. Defra withdrawal of funds and now NCC officials say no, is a rude awakening for the county to ditch the burner but some councillors do not want to admit defeat and plough on squandering tax payer’s money.

    Report this comment

    Alan Allan

    Sunday, April 6, 2014

  • Unfortunately the podcast appears to ignore the significant changes in waste scenario over the past 8 years . Waste data confirms a 67,000 tonne reduction in Norfolk’s annual residual household waste over recent years and this reflects the national trend . Authorities are already achieving 70% recycling capability and we are aware recycling provides additional jobs and can save 70% more energy than burning in EfW plants plus it ensures a significant revenue stream for the Council. The Lincolnshire experience confirms that incineration diverts resources from superior waste streams with obvious consequences and we are aware other Authorities are hauling waste must greater distances in order to sustain incinerator projects. Any claim that diverting waste to incinerator projects in adjacent Counties adds to haulage impact requires serious scrutiny when aware of the geographic reality and Norfolk waste creation data. The claim in clause 3.1 of officer’s report that “APC will be used in beneficial way” requires detailed information of the process and where it will be carried out when aware the material is hazardous and requires specialised transport and disposal. All data published to date confirms that to commit ratepayer cash to a long term fixed burn defies due diligence and duty of care especially when aware of the reducing waste reality, the superior processes available and the current incinerator project capability in adjacent Counties that will compete for resources. The project guarantees air quality degradation with hazardous pollution burden per unit of useful power out many times higher than other local power alternatives .The deadly fine particles created have no safe level of exposure and the scheduled emissions will equate to millions of additional local journeys by diesel vehicles each day. Based on data published to date it is hoped that common sense will prevail with the project cancelled and any compensation claim subjected to in depth scrutiny especially when aware it appears to be speculative and lacking support data . This is public money so surely every penny claimed must be fully justified.

    Report this comment

    Brian W

    Sunday, April 6, 2014

  • Excellent question, John Lillburn, there follows the need for a new broom to considerreview positions, although I fear that closing ranks along Wattonlad's description, is very likely. Some, finding their seat too hot might want to jump off before finges are pointed. Hallo Mr. Jackson, safe and sound in South west Cornwall. So what about waste minimisation and recycling by business in Norfolk? awareness of redesign, or the long term elimination of difficult waste, what of recovering resources from landfill sites and turning the fill into sync gas here in Norfolk? Norfolk?

    Report this comment

    ingo wagenknecht

    Sunday, April 6, 2014

  • B Ungatory, I would be surprised if anyone's banked much at all, normally payouts aren't made until after the building starts. This wasn't just reserved for the Conservatives, unless you think Nobbs was pretending to oppose the incinerator before becoming Leader, something gave him the incentive to become an avid supporter. Of course he thinks there's no need for an investigation, it's probably one of the reasons why they're pulling out, none of them can be allowed to get away with what they've done least of all Jackson.

    Report this comment

    Honest John

    Monday, April 7, 2014

  • When the Incinerator issue is finally terminated, will the ratepayers of Norfolk be given the reasons why the Council's legal advisers advocated entering into a contract with such onerous penalty clauses ?

    Report this comment

    john lillburn

    Friday, April 4, 2014

The views expressed in the above comments do not necessarily reflect the views of this site

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Norfolk Weather

Heavy Rain

Heavy Rain

max temp: 16°C

min temp: 9°C

Five-day forecast

loading...

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT