IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Chieveley incinerator, 3-0 to the nimbies
Bofem
post Jan 14 2011, 02:10 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 485
Joined: 28-May 10
From: Newbury
Member No.: 924



You may be aware that the BBC always measures large spaces in areas the 'size of Wales', and at the NWN, to help us understand things that are really tall, they prefer "X times as big as the BT Tower in Newbury".

There's "shock" at the "huge" "plant" "processing" "radioactive materials" on a "greenfield site". Got that? It's a REALLY BAD IDEA.

But wait. Some facts (as well as Grundon quotes) are missing.

household waste is increasing at 3% a year in West Berks.

People burning rubbish in back gardens is much more polluting than these new superclean plants. waste to energy plant.

Household energy costs set to rise 60% by 2015. So there's huge demand for alternatives to oil, gas and coal.

We have no landfill left. The Hermitage landfill is full up (of carrier bags, leaching battery acid, eternal plastic etc). The nearest is at Sutton Courtenay Abingdon, which is the home to most of London's waste (brought up by train since you ask). So there's no shortage of rubbish to be buried in the ground.

Chieveley's very good at making sure nothing happens at J13. They blocked plans 20 years ago for a business park/warehousing there, so it went to Greenham airbase instead. Worth a thought next time you're snarled up on the A339.

There's an oppportunity for West Berks to have cheaper energy and a cut in council tax if this can be negotiated properly. Remember the EU waste levy means WBC has to pay for every tonne of landfilled rubbish.

I know the NWN hasn't sourced any pro-voices yet, but it maybe not such a bad thing.


--------------------
Newbury's #1 ill-informed internet poster
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
admin
post Jan 14 2011, 02:19 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Administrators
Posts: 59
Joined: 3-March 09
Member No.: 2



Newburytoday approached Grundon for comments yesterday (Thursday) who said they would respond on Monday. Watch this space.....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Jan 14 2011, 02:19 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,053
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



Produce less waste. Re-use & recycle.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mark NWN
post Jan 14 2011, 02:27 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 19-May 10
Member No.: 907



Hi, I was about to start a thread to ask for the forum input on this topic.

It is an extremely complex issue with a number of important points on both sides which need highlighting, such as the environmental impact and the growing need for such facilities across the UK.

I would welcome your comments, either on this forum or via email mark.taylor@nwn.co.uk
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bofem
post Jan 14 2011, 02:31 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 485
Joined: 28-May 10
From: Newbury
Member No.: 924



QUOTE (admin @ Jan 14 2011, 02:19 PM) *
Newburytoday approached Grundon for comments yesterday (Thursday) who said they would respond on Monday. Watch this space.....


Good work and keep going please. A little curious though to ask for a quote AFTER you've published! It looks to most readers like you stitched Grundon up.

If Grundon's....er...rubbish at presentation, then this application deserves to fail. But any chance we can have impartial debate, with the risks AND benefits outlined in any follow-up.


--------------------
Newbury's #1 ill-informed internet poster
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jan 14 2011, 03:34 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,956
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



It all has to go somewhere.
There is no such thing as environmentally friendly rubbish.
We all create it and, until we can recycle everything, it has to be disposed of.
It is a case of which is the lesser evil.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 14 2011, 04:08 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



It is better to focus on not having the rubbish manufactured in the first place.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jan 14 2011, 05:19 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,956
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (Iommi @ Jan 14 2011, 06:08 PM) *
It is better to focus on not having the rubbish manufactured in the first place.

True, but in our current have everything, throw away society this is just not going to happen.
You are talking of a major culture change there.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bofem
post Jan 14 2011, 05:33 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 485
Joined: 28-May 10
From: Newbury
Member No.: 924



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jan 14 2011, 05:19 PM) *
True, but in our current have everything, throw away society this is just not going to happen.
You are talking of a major culture change there.


I think you can....the idea of picking up your own dogs' poo was pretty weird 20 years ago but seems to have caught on.

Grundon's come up with an interesting idea, but like the wind turbines previously, the places where things like this can work are stuffed full of older people who don't care what state they leave the planet in when they shuffle off this mortal coil. So it will of course be defeated - why should they make sacrifices?


--------------------
Newbury's #1 ill-informed internet poster
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Jan 14 2011, 05:33 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



But if Veolia have the waste contract, and so much was spent on Padworth, what waste will be burnt at Chievely?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Jan 14 2011, 05:38 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jan 14 2011, 05:33 PM) *
But if Veolia have the waste contract, and so much was spent on Padworth, what waste will be burnt at Chievely?


What is scary here is that I suspect you really do not know the answer........
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
theone09
post Jan 14 2011, 05:42 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 14-September 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 341



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jan 14 2011, 05:33 PM) *
But if Veolia have the waste contract, and so much was spent on Padworth, what waste will be burnt at Chievely?


commercial waste I guess? from Grundon's commercial contracts...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Jan 14 2011, 05:46 PM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,024
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jan 14 2011, 05:33 PM) *
But if Veolia have the waste contract, and so much was spent on Padworth, what waste will be burnt at Chievely?
Another gaffe it would seem. laugh.gif

He'll be calling for an enquiry into what waste will be burnt at Chievely next.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bofem
post Jan 14 2011, 06:13 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 485
Joined: 28-May 10
From: Newbury
Member No.: 924



QUOTE (user23 @ Jan 14 2011, 05:46 PM) *
Another gaffe it would seem. laugh.gif

He'll be calling for an enquiry into what waste will be burnt at Chievely next.


Garvie-baiting will send you blind, young man.
anyway...do you think we should have an incinerator?


--------------------
Newbury's #1 ill-informed internet poster
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Jan 14 2011, 06:16 PM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (user23 @ Jan 14 2011, 05:46 PM) *
Another gaffe it would seem. laugh.gif

He'll be calling for an enquiry into what waste will be burnt at Chievely next.

Speaks the person who's sole purpose seems to be to ridicule posts that contain anti-council rhetoric. It would be interesting to know what the person behind the user23 'mask' really thinks about things.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Jan 14 2011, 07:50 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,451
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (Iommi @ Jan 14 2011, 06:16 PM) *
Speaks the person who's sole purpose seems to be to ridicule posts that contain anti-council rhetoric. It would be interesting to know what the person behind the user23 'mask' really thinks about things.


Like the councillor on the vicar of Dibley. No No No Yes! Except the vicar of Dibley council probably are more sensible than this lot. wink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Jan 14 2011, 08:11 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



Or maybe there is another motive. Maybe you should do some digging...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ron
post Jan 14 2011, 08:27 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 271
Joined: 15-August 09
Member No.: 277



Why burn it? There are other means of producing energy from waste. As lead engineer I worked on a project where the waste was not sorted at source but at site. It was put through a series of rotating autoclaves where the rubbish was heated by steam. The product coming out was passed through a sorting system to select the recyclables, and then the residue was sent to anaerobic digesters to produce gas. The sludge from the digesters was sent for composting. The gas was used to produce the steam for the autoclaves and the rest went to gas engined generators where the electricity went to the grid. I have a recollection that about 5% was to go to tip, although we were looking at using this fibre residue to produce building materials. The first fullsze protype is just going through its testing. The building was certainly no where near the height of the one put forward for Chievely.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Jan 14 2011, 08:50 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



QUOTE (Ron @ Jan 14 2011, 08:27 PM) *
Why burn it? There are other means of producing energy from waste. As lead engineer I worked on a project where the waste was not sorted at source but at site. It was put through a series of rotating autoclaves where the rubbish was heated by steam. The product coming out was passed through a sorting system to select the recyclables, and then the residue was sent to anaerobic digesters to produce gas. The sludge from the digesters was sent for composting. The gas was used to produce the steam for the autoclaves and the rest went to gas engined generators where the electricity went to the grid. I have a recollection that about 5% was to go to tip, although we were looking at using this fibre residue to produce building materials. The first fullsze protype is just going through its testing. The building was certainly no where near the height of the one put forward for Chievely.


The one near Slough is huge!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bofem
post Jan 15 2011, 07:16 AM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 485
Joined: 28-May 10
From: Newbury
Member No.: 924



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Jan 14 2011, 08:50 PM) *
The one near Slough is huge!!!


Yes yes, but so we can grasp the concept you have to tell us how it compares to the BT Tower in Newbury. (this is not to be confused with spending cuts, which are to be compared in terms of numbers of teachers or nurses). unsure.gif


--------------------
Newbury's #1 ill-informed internet poster
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st January 2019 - 02:08 AM