Incineration health risks should be given top priority (Ipswich Liberal Democrats)

Ipswich Liberal Democrats <info@ipswichlibdems.org.uk>

Incineration health risks should be given top priority

February 25, 2008 3:20 PM

Cllr Andrew Cann has fought to get 'confidential' incinerator documents released to the public

Liberal Democrats have reacted with concern that the Conservative County Council administration appears to give public health a lower weighting in its business case for an incinerator than other factors.

An edited version of the business has finally been made public, after sustained pressure from the Liberal Democrats at the County Council. In the document the two main options for the future of waste in Suffolk, mechanical and biological treatment and an incinerator were assessed against a series of criteria which had been ranked to show their importance, or the weight which ought to be given them.

The "impact on the health of residents of Suffolk" was weighted as "high" in terms of importance, however "offtake risk", which reflects the risk involved in disposing of the residue after treatment was weighted as "very high".

The 'offtake risk' relates to the problems a company may have in dealing with the residue left after either mechanical & biological treatment or incineration. If no market for this type of residual product can be found the product may have to be landfilled, for example.

Concerns over emissions were raised when Norfolk County Council proposed to build an incinerator. There were fears that serious health issues could be caused by the smallest particles emitted from incinerators, which are believed to be harmful to human health when absorbed into the lungs

Cllr Andrew Cann, Deputy Leader of the Libdems on the County Council said, "After waiting for over a month I received this report. I am deeply concerned that it appears that the Conservative Administration does not consider impacts on the health of the people of Suffolk to be of the highest priority.

In Norfolk, the county council felt that studies into the health impacts of incinerators were inconclusive and rejected incineration. Norfolk showed they take health-based concerns very seriously as we would expect them to do so.

Furthermore the document seems to demonstrate that Mechanical and Biological Treatment is better environmentally than incineration. The Conservatives however seems to have rejected this analysis, choosing incineration on cost alone.

This report provides more questions than answers. Why does it appear that the health of the people of Suffolk is not of the highest priority? Why does the report demonstrate, twice, that Mechanical and Biological Treatment is the more environmental solution, yet it is rejected by the Tories?

We need an open, public debate rather than this secretive process. It should start with coming clean over the site of the incinerator."