LOCAL MP Andrew Murrison has joined the campaign to fight the gasification plant and waste sorting station in Westbury.
He has written to Wiltshire Council to oppose the planning application to construct the plant, a move that has been welcomed by local protestors at a time when the topic of incineration sweeps the country.
Andrew Murrison said, “I have done some work on the evidence published so far and agree that, from what’s been reported, the risks to health from emissions in plants like this do seem to be low.
“However, they cannot be ruled out, which means the precautionary principle should apply to applications like this, that involve sites close to where people live. Where there’s doubt, incinerators, pyrolysis and gasification plants should be located as far from human habitation as possible, not right on top of it.
“It’s also important to point out that most of the waste, if the proposed plant becomes fully operational, would travel long distances to get to Westbury. The town has no bypass, which means more heavy traffic along the A350 right through the middle of Westbury where, in places, air quality is already poor. More heavy lorries belching fumes as they cart the region’s waste though the town centre is just not on.”
The MP is also tabling questions in the Commons about Public Health England’s assessment of health risks from emissions and particulates from municipal energy from waste plants.
Incineration and gasification plants are remaining hot topics in the area, and also across the country, as companies seek to build ‘energy from waste’ plants in towns and villages.
Last week, on his Radio 2 programme, presenter Jeremy Vine reported on a planning proposal for another incinerator in Bedfordshire, discussing the health risks involved with a local resident and campaigner. The resident explained that the main issues of these proposed plants are the size of the plants, the importing of waste from across the country adding to traffic on towns and village roads and the health risks of the plant.
In Westbury, a campaign group,the Westbury Gasification Action Group, has been formed to question the health risks involved in such a waste plant.
Campaigner, Maggy Daniell, of the Westbury group said, “It is great to have the support of our local MP. As he is also a doctor, his words carry even more weight.
“The ‘precautionary principle’ is spot on. If you can’t be sure people’s health won’t be harmed, don’t do it. And the scientific data to indicate that health IS harmed is being produced. The regulations just haven’t caught up yet.”
Another member of the group, Margaret Cavanna said, “I agree with Dr Murrison’s assertion that this is totally the wrong siting for this kind of operation, and that the precautionary principle should prevail. An incinerator, plus the ongoing construction of thousands of new homes, do not make for a good mix.
“Even when passed through expensive filters, incinerator fumes contain dioxins, NOx gases and ultrafine particles related to cancers, respiratory and other diseases. These would be the bi-products of the 24/7 day-to-day operation. But add to that the risk, however small, of a major incident such as an explosion, and the consequences are too dire to contemplate.”
Stephen Eades, from North Wiltshire Friends of the Earth said, “The concerns of Westbury’s MP, Dr. Andrew Murrison, are very valid. Especially when he notes that such plants should not be built next to towns, but rather as far from human habitation as possible. It is worth noting that the only other gasification incinerator in the South West, at Avonmouth, has been closed for over two years – due to reopen 2018 – because of complex problems in being able to gasify municipal waste.
“This is the same type of waste – household waste – that Hills want to gasify and their contractor, Bioenergy Infrastructure, appears to have no previous experience in gasifying household waste. Along with the risk of “plume grounding”, it is clear this gasification incinerator is being proposed in the wrong place. Consequently Wiltshire Council need to give this proposal the thumbs down.”
