AS local people await Wiltshire Council’s decision on whether to give permission for a waste incinerator to be built in the town, the local protest group, WGAG/No Incinerator is continuing to fight the plans.
Consultation has been taking place by the Environment Agency (EA) about the issuing of a permit, but the group says the consultation period should be extended.
In a statement the group says, “The horrors of the Covid-19 pandemic have been largely unavoidable and unpredictable. But the presence of ‘Air Pollution’ is almost wholly predictable and is an issue that we can stand up to and improve.
“After a very sad but revealing test case just announced following the death of a nine year old girl (Ella Kissi-Debrah) in London, we may soon see ‘Air Pollution’ appearing as the major cause of death on ‘death certificates’ in our region – unless we all act to raise awareness of possible issues and spell them out to decision makers!
“The widespread concern over air quality in our town is a very real and well-documented concern. You would think this concern should guide decision makers into not further risking lives in Westbury and the surrounding district – it must.
“In fact, ‘Wiltshire Intelligence Report’ health data from the period 2015 – 2017 states that the mortality rate from cancer in Westbury (per 100k) in persons under 75 years is the highest in Wiltshire and the Second Highest from cardiovascular diseases. Clearly this is not a good starting point from which to ‘sing the benefits’ that the proposed NREL incinerator will bring to our town if approved by Wiltshire Council’s Strategic Planning Committee and permitted for ‘safe operation’ by the Environment Agency.
“Both decisions for this regrettable proposed infrastructure are expected around February 2020 and the EA permit is currently in a consultation phase. The Strategic Planning Committee must now be aware of the 2500 + legitimate concerns made to the council planning website, including those from 17 Town and Parish Councils in our region. We can now add our voices and words to the current EA consultation phase which is ‘open’. We believe that because of two additional published briefings that it should be extended well beyond the current deadline at the end of January. We must let the EA know these things and demand an extension for greater scrutiny.
“Let’s get real about the actual ‘plume’ and what the Environment Agency need to be hearing from us (see also https://plumeplotter.com/ westbury/ ). We know that the ‘plume’ will spread from the ‘adjacent to town’ site, if the plant is built! The proposed NREL plume would drift right across the centre of our town.
“The Cement Works chimney, was of course, on the other side of town. Many Westbury residents will remember the drift, stench of burning tyres and particulate ‘drop out’ from the skies on cars. Tell the EA all about it please! Tell them about how different weather conditions and the terrain where you are affected this too! Did you live in a dip or up at Newtown that hindered the dispersal of the plume?
“Tell them that NREL have used statistics from ‘Lyneham’ to model the proposed dispersion at the Westbury site. Possibly ask ‘Why would they do this’ when there are other meteorological stats available from much nearer our town? There is even an anemometer (Wind measurement and direction device) already fitted to NREL/Hills ‘existing ‘MBT’ plant in Westbury for example. Why are they not using that data? The EA will only know this stuff if we tell them.
“You could tell the Environment Agency that NREL wants to build this plant to take 243,000 tonnes of waste onto a site that is less than 3 acres in size! When you compare this with the nearest Energy from Waste (EfW) plant at Javelin Park (Gloucester) notice that Javelin Park has a 60% bigger site (at 5.2 acres). Notice again that it takes less waste than is targeted for Westbury.
“The proposed incinerator would be storing on site additional fuel oil, large tanks of ammonia and other chemicals for assisting the process. On top of thousands of tonnes of waste in the bunker, all this squeezed next to the MBT plant with history of fires, flies and odour. The Westbury Northacre site is simply too small for all this.
“Tell them that figures suggest that at peak times HGV vehicles could be unloading on site every minute if this plant is built. Fires, odours and noise are a constant risk at such plants too!
The new EA [Environment Agency] briefing (No 8) states they will look at the potential impacts on health and local environment. This will not include the particulate matter below 2.5 though, and we are aware that these fine particulates are the most dangerous, entering direct into our blood stream.
“Wiltshire Council and the Environment Agency need to address our concerns. It’s up to us to tell them.
“People power in Westbury is really getting stronger every day, so please be mindful of these words, and be ready to act and speak both ‘up’ and ‘out’ in the New Year. Let us make Westbury better ‘as we Live & Breathe!’ • westburygag@gmail.com
Town council to consider
environmental impact
Continued from front page
plumes of smoke fall to the ground from chimneys – would occur 11 months of the year when the incinerator is working.
Nadia asked, “Will Westbury Town Council, as the representative of the residents, ask the Environment Agency to consider the above as being most important for our health?”
And Dan Gmaj from the local WGAG/No Incinerator group said, “Councillors should be aware that there are calls for the Environment Agency to extend this consultation period to the end of February 2021 to account for the contrasting briefings issued. We are now on briefing 8 although, as of this morning, briefing 6 still shows on their website.”
The clerk told members that Dan had requested that the committee consider issuing an immediate statement to urge the Environmental Agency (EA) to extend the consultation by 6 weeks to allow for maximum scrutiny.
Cllr Gordon King said he would like to see the briefings for himself to see if there was any confusion.
“I’m conscious of the fact that the EA will not acquiesce to any such request without good reason, so I’m not entirely sure that there are good reasons and I know that people have asked for extensions up until now and that all requests have been rebuffed,” he said.
Cllr Cunningham proposed the clerk look into the matter and report back and everyone voted in favour.
He also made reassurances after Dan Gmaj questioned whether air quality data recorded by a recently-purchased air monitor would be used by the council.
“It is the intention of the council to use any data we have as background data against future measurements,” cllr Cunningham said.
