|

MIKE HALL MP SUBMISSION TO THE PUBLIC ENQUIRY ON THE INCE MARSHES RESOURCE RECOVERY PARK

I am the Member of Parliament for Weaver Vale.

I have been contacted directly by a very large number of constituents who are opposed to the plans by Peel Holdings to build what they call a Resource Recovery Park incorporating an incinerator which will burn Refuse Derived Fuel.

Cheshire County Council has rejected the Peel Holding planning application and I support that refusal and oppose the appeal by Peel Holdings at this public enquiry.

The Cheshire County Council Replacement Waste Local Plan aims to achieve a more sustainable approach to waste management within Cheshire.

The Local Plan establishes policies against which planning applications for the development of waste management facilities will be assessed.

It does this by identifying sites which are considered suitable for waste management use in order to enable the development of an adequate network of waste management facilities.

The Cheshire County Council Replacement Waste Local Plan does not designate Ince Marshes as a site suitable for a Resource Recovery Park incorporating an incinerator.

Attempts by Peel Holdings to change the status of Ince Marshes within the Cheshire Replacement Waste Local Plan were rejected.

The proposed site for this Resource Recovery Park and incinerator is a green field site. It is currently used for agricultural purposes.

My constituents are very concerned about the adverse impact on their health, on the health of their children and the general impact on public health of burning 600,000 tonnes of waste a year.

They are particularly concerned about carcinogenic emissions from the incinerator such as dioxins. They are also concerned about the emissions of ultra fine particulates.

My constituents are not reassured by the claims by Peel Holdings that they will be able to operate the incinerator safely.

Peel Holdings have not been able say with absolute certainty that the emissions form the incinerator will not have any adverse effect on public health.

My constituents are aware of the industrial nature of this part of north Cheshire.

My constituents in the Runcorn New Town are fully aware of the high mortality rates from cancer, heart attack, stroke and high infant mortality.

The overwhelming response I have received from constituents is that they already have enough industrial pollution without having to have the pollution from an incinerator burning waste.

The Resource Recovery Park and incinerator with its 100 meter high stack will have a detrimental impact on the physical environment of Ince Marshes.

With a chimney stack the size of two Olympic swimming pools standing end to end it will be visible for miles around and will be a blot on the landscape.

It will have the effect of developing another green field site in an area already very much developed area.

The proposed development will be very intrusive on the environment.

The residents of Helsby in my constituency already have to put up with three huge industrial complexes, the Shell Refinery, Kemira, and Quinn Glass.

In the past these companies have not always been good neighbours.

The residents of Helsby are entitled to enjoy the residential amenity of their homes.

If the application for the Ince Marshes Resource Recovery Park and incinerator are given the go ahead, that would adversely affect the daily enjoyment of the homes of the people who live in the vicinity of Ince Marshes.

My constituents are also very concerned about how the 600,000 tonnes of waste per year will be brought to the site.

In Peel’s Non Technical Summary of their application they envisage the waste being brought to the site by a multi modal approach using canals, rail and the highway network.

Peel say that additional demands placed on the highway can be met without causing significant adverse impacts on the operations of the highway and the highways will continue to operate within capacity.

My constituents dispute this. They point to the heavy congestion on the A56 and M56.

Any additional heavy goods lorries using the A56 Chester road and the M56 will add to the existing congestion. There will be increased carbon monoxide emissions from the lorries adding more pollution to the atmosphere.

This in turn will have an adverse affect on public health. It will impact on the physical environment.

Any increase in HGVs on local roads will have an adverse effect on the daily enjoyment of people’s lives and their residential amenity will suffer further.

My constituents are also concerned that Peel Holding are planning to import waste from outside Cheshire to burn at Ince Marshes.

Cheshire does not produce 600,000 tonnes of waste and it is planned to bring in waste from Merseyside and Greater Manchester.

As recycling rates grow, as they have significantly in Cheshire, it is clear that there will not be enough regionally produced waste to sustain the Peel Resource Recovery Park and incinerator.

The size of the plant and the need to keep the incinerator burning 24 hours a day 365 days a year will put pressure on Peel to import waste from abroad.

My constituents are opposed to the importation of waste from abroad. They are very concerned about the carbon footprint of bringing rubbish to burn over long distances by whatever means.

My constituents are also concerned that the incinerator has to be kept at a constant temperature to achieve controlled emissions, so when supplies of waste run low then either oil or gas will have to be burnt. If this happens it would be a complete waste of finite resources that could be put to better use elsewhere.

I conclude on the point of the precautionary principle. We should not take actions now that we do not fully understand that could harm the health of the population or the environment.

In the absence of an absolute guarantee that the emissions from the incinerators and associated activities will not have any impact on public health and or the environment this appeal should be rejected.