OXFORDSHIRE County Council has invited two firms to submit planning applications to build massive incinerators to burn waste, one of them is proposed to be built at Sutton Courtenay. The plans have been met with a swelling tide of opposition.
Despite being the choice of the Conservative controlled County Council, the growing unpopularity of the plans have caused some local Conservative MPs to question them.
Well known local Green activist, Mark Stevenson, who briefly acquired national fame last year by taking third place in the Henley by-election to replace Boris Johnson, said: “I am glad to see Ed Vaizy weighing in on our side. One of my main concerns is that the County has let us down by encouraging commercial companies to determine how to treat our waste. They are bound to choose what is best for them, not what is best for Oxfordshire.”
Energy from waste incineration is likely to become an issue in the County Council elections this June. The protest group, Sutton Courtenay Against Incineration, has been sounding out the views of potential candidates and has considered whether to run an anti-incinerator candidate.
Mark Stevenson will contest the Dorchester and Berinsfield seat on the County Council because of his concerns about, what he sees as, the poor decision making process.
“The Council has failed to take proper responsibility in deciding a strategy for managing our waste, leaving it up to commercial operators is not the answer. With improving recycling, separation and composting of kitchen waste there will be less residual waste but the County are preparing to lock us, the tax payers, into a twenty five year contract to supply hundreds of thousands of tonnes of waste every year to feed the incinerator. If it doesn?t fulfil the contract, the County may be liable to substantial financial penalty. As council tax payers we need to be aware of this.”
Mr Stevenson, who helped form both his parish council?s objections to the plans and those of the Dorchester Carbon Project, also submitted a personal letter of objection.
“Regional and national planning guidelines clearly say that major decisions on how a council deals with waste should be part of a coherent and formal strategy. This decision showed no strategy at all,” said Mr Stevenson.
“The council have not thought about what is the best way forward to help us reduce and dispose of waste, instead they have encouraged commercial interests to choose what they would like. It might suit the shareholders of WRG, but it won?t necessarily suit the residents of Oxfordshire.”
A further cause of concern is the potential health risk. Over the last two decades European and Government limits on emissions have constantly been tightened up. The World Health Organisation and the Government?s Health Protection Agency both say that there is no safe exposure to dioxins and furans (toxic particles that will be emitted by the incinerator). However there is an agreed “daily tolerable intake”, below which the health risk is statistically insignificant.
“The problem”, said Mr Stevenson, “is that no one knows what the current levels of these and other toxins are in this area. The company proposing to build the Sutton Courtenay incinerator has based its figures on national averages, but we need to know what the actual effect on our local area will be. These compounds are also emitted by Didcot Power station and by vehicle exhausts. South Oxfordshire has much higher than average car use because of its rural nature and lack of public transport. The likelihood is that we have already a higher than average count of these toxins, we may not want to add any more.”
So incineration promises to be a hot topic for the approaching County Council election, not least because the Council has scheduled a decision on the planning application to be made once the election has been called, but before it takes place. Mark Stevenson asks: “For a decision of this magnitude, surely that is inappropriate?”
Photo: Mark Stevenson