Incinerator health assessment (Oxford West and Abingdon Liberal Democrats)

Oxford West and Abingdon Liberal Democrats <info@oxwablibdems.org.uk>

Incinerator health assessment

January 23, 2009 2:35 PM
By Jean Fooks
Originally published by Oxfordshire Liberal Democrats

No-one disagrees with the pressing need to reduce waste sent to landfill to avoid hefty fines from the government. More waste could and should be recycled. The County Council invited bids for disposal of the residual waste more than four years ago; the only technologies offered were energy-from-waste, or incineration.

Sites have now been identified for such a plant, Sutton Courtenay and Ardley, and local residents have raised much concern about the possible risks to public health and the environment. New research suggests that even modern incinerators may not be as safe as was believed, with new evidence emerging on the dangers of very small particles, PM2.5s, which can be absorbed into the lungs.

I proposed the motion in Council, referred to in your article (Oxford Times, January 16th), asking that the Cabinet commission an independent assessment of the risks to public health and the environment before a final decision is taken. As you reported, the Conservative members present, with one exception, voted to rely solely on the statutory bodies, the Health Protection Agency and the Environment Agency, who would be consulted before any plant was licensed.

Oxford City Council voted unanimously in 2007 to oppose any plant which posed a risk to the health of the people of Oxford. It would be grossly irresponsible for the County Council to support any plant which posed a risk to the health of any of the residents of Oxfordshire. Cllr Mitchell said the council taxpayers would not thank us if we had huge fines imposed as a result of missing our landfill reduction targets. But I think the taxpayers of Oxfordshire would not thank us if we allowed the building and commissioning of a plant which posed a risk to their health.

It may be that adequate controls of any possible emissions can be assured. But sufficient concerns have been raised by respected scientific bodies, doctors and epidemiologists, to indicate that an independent enquiry, such as a Health Impact Assessment, which requires community involvement, should be commissioned before any building starts. Brushing people's concerns under the carpet is not the answer.