The rubbish, the incinerator and the villagers battling over a burning issue

A plot of land, close to the A1, halfway between Harrogate and York, has recently emerged as unlikely battleground.

Hundreds of commuters drive past the landfill site at Allerton Park each day and with the large piles of rubbish hard to spot from the road, most don't even know it is there.

However, when North Yorkshire County Council and City of York Council unveiled plans for a brand new 900m plant on the site, residents in the surrounding villages did begin to sit up and take notice.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Hearing the blueprint proposed by private waste management company AmeyCespa involved an incinerator, which will handle up to 320,000 tonnes of waste a year and add a 260ft chimney to the North Yorkshire horizon, protest groups began to be formed.

Ever since, members of the Don't Incinerate Steering Committee and the North Yorkshire Waste Action Group have been trying to rally support to halt what they see as controversial and unnecessary plans.

"We have two steam rollers coming towards us," says chief executive of North Yorkshire County Council Richard Flinton. "One is the cost of getting rid of waste, one is the rising cost of social care for adults. If we don't find a way of saving money, every service we run will be hit. The tax we pay to put waste in landfill is set to increase dramatically, rising to 1.8bn by 2035. Doing nothing is not an option. We have thought long and hard about it and by building this plant we would save taxpayers up to 320m over the next 25 years."

It's not quite the way the protesters see it.

"There are huge financial and environmental issues surrounding this plant which no one involved seems prepared to discuss," says Steve Wright, chairman of NYWAG. "It's easy to bombard the public with statistics, but behind those lies the real story which affects not just those who live in the villages nearby, but everyone in the county."

RECYCLING RATES

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

What the opponents say: Recycling rates in North Yorkshire are woeful – in Harrogate itself it stands at just 32 per cent. If the council invested more in kerbside recycling, it would be fairly easy to increase the rate to 70 per cent, which would remove the need for an incinerator, at least on this kind of scale. Such high levels of recycling have been achieved in San Francisco and there is no reason we can't do the same over here.

What the council says: Our first priority is to improve the levels of recycling and we have set a minimum target to recycle 50 per cent of household waste by 2020. However, recycling alone is not a cure-all. Take Ryedale, which is almost the ideal place for recycling. There are no large flat developments, people have gardens and the space to accommodate boxes, and residents currently have four different bins to sort their waste. However, even there, the recycling rate is only 52 per cent. With the best will in the world, 100 per cent recycling is not achievable. Comparisons to San Francisco are misleading, largely because the 70 per cent figure so often quoted also includes commercial waste. If you strip the figures down, the amount of household waste actually recycled is 41 per cent. Also, even if it were possible to reach the golden 70 per cent target, the question remains, what do you with the other 30 per cent?

THE ENVIRONMENT

What the opponents say: Incineration is old technology. It will be out of date as soon as it is installed and North Yorkshire will be left with an environmentally unfriendly white elephant.

What the council says: Firstly, the incinerator is only one part of the plant. The rubbish will initially pass through mechanical separation where any items that have been missed in initial recycling, like cans and plastic bottles, will be removed and 40,000 tonnes a year of

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

organic waste material will be extracted and sent to the anaerobic digester. At the moment, this waste goes directly into landfill and produces substantial methane gas emissions. What's left after these first two processes – and that admittedly will be a large percentage of the waste which comes in – will go into the incinerator. This

technology is now considered by many leading experts to be an

environmentally friendly way to deal with waste. There are

approximately 50 plants similar to this one in development and by

burning the rubbish, rather than burying it in the ground, we will

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

reduce carbon emissions equivalent of 12,000 extra cars a year on the roads of North Yorkshire.

A QUESTION OF SIZE

What the opponents say: The incinerator is simply too big. The amount of waste produced by households is decreasing and by the time the plant opens, we will be producing 100,000 tonnes less than its 320,000 capacity. The shortfall will be made up with commercial waste, which begs the question why taxpayers money should be used to pay for a commercial facility?

What the council says: The incinerator does have a capacity to take 320,000 tonnes of waste a year. At the moment, the city of York produces 55,000 tonnes a year and the rest of North Yorkshire around 210,000 tonnes a year. However, no-one builds a project of this kind just to meet the needs of the day. While it's true the amount of

rubbish household produce is reducing, our population is also

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

increasing. Thousands of new homes are due to be built over the lifetime of this project and their waste needs will have to be met. Initially, commercial waste from schools, restaurants and shops will make up the shortfall, but over the years that will reduce and the incinerator will eventually burn only household waste.

A BLOT ON THE LANDSCAPE

What the opponents say: The site currently earmarked at Allerton Park is the gateway to the Dales. The incinerator will be a blight on the landscape and could open the floodgates for further industrial

developments. Add in the fact the long-term effects of incineration are unproven and it seems the council is playing fast and loose with our futures.

What the council says: The site is not an oasis of rolling green fields. It is currently a landfill site and aside from the huge piles of rubbish, there are also stagnant pools of waste water. Thirty years ago, it's true that many incinerators did not meet good environmental

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

standards, but a lot has changed in that time. It is now one of the most highly regulated industries in the country and, with many

incinerators already in operation, there has been chance to track what effects they have on surrounding communities. Currently, 28 per cent of the population already live 10 miles from an incinerator, and no health problems or environmental damage has been recorded. Incineration is safe. North Yorkshire's crematoriums give off the same levels of toxins as this incinerator will and scaremongering about health risks simply

isn't helpful.

THE GOVERNMENT REVIEW

What the opponents say: Secretary of State for Defra, Caroline Spelman, has recently announced a full review of waste policies in England. Should the council not wait until the findings are published next

spring rather than simply pushing ahead with these plans?

What the council says: When the new Government came into power, they called back all projects for which money had already been earmarked. They have since given this waste project the green light. Of course, we all know that there are tough times are ahead, that's part of why we need this scheme to go ahead, but while there are never any hard and fast guarantees it would seem that our plans already meet the

Government's own green and value for money criteria.

ECONOMIC BENEFITS

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

What the opponents say: The new facility will create 70 jobs, which is obviously good news, but just imagine how many new positions could be created through a big push on recycling. Are they seriously trying to persuade us that 900m to create fewer than 100 jobs is good value

for money?

What the council says: We are talking about a lot of money, but we do believe it is the best way of solving the problem of waste. As well as jobs for those at the plant, its construction will also provide employment for a significant amount of people. When it is up and

running, the incinerator will produce enough energy to power 40,000

homes in the county. Also, the bottom ash, which is basically the residue left after incineration and of which there will be between

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

50,000 and 60,000 tonnes a year, will be used in road construction.

CONSULTATION

What the opponents say: There has been a lack of openness about the plans and the council has refused to listen to residents' concerns. The long and short of it is, no one wants the incinerator, but our views don't seem to matter.

What the council says: The opposition to the plant is localised,

centred on the villages near to the planned development. The concerns of residents are understandable and some of the groups have been asking sensible questions about the likely impact of the scheme. We have nothing to hide and our plans have always been clear. We know there are some people who will never be convinced this is the right way to go and we're not sure we can do anything about that other than to carry on informing people about the issues in advance of the decision that councillors will have to make and taking into account the comments we have received in our final report to council in October.