How pleasing to find another local resident who is so concerned about the issue of incineration of household waste.
Duncan Baird has highlighted a number of basic flaws in the interpretation of the public consultation, which ERYC claim resulted
in a demand for incineration. In fact, only 6,000 out of 600,000 East Riding residents asked for it.
He is correct. Burning will produce dioxins and leave a toxic bottom ash. Regarding this ash, the Government encourages its use in the concrete blocks used in building houses. Even more dangerous is the illegal practice of incorporating the even more toxic fly ash in these blocks as well. What a legacy that will give residents, especially as the houses age and the blocks begin to deteriorate and release their toxic contents.
Unfortunately, government policy encourages incineration, irrespective of the inevitable risks to the health of the population and to the environment in the years ahead.
The politicians take a short-term view - low costs, ignore the long-term impact of any decision.
The technology is potentially so dangerous to the environment and the health and lives of future generations that it should be evaluated far more carefully. The true costs are incalculable.
I believe the seven East Riding Conservative Cabinet members voted in favour of incineration without consideration of how their decision will affect people in 20, 50 or 100 years time.
Can they put their hands on their hearts and swear that they fully understand the chemical reactions that go on within an incinerator or the dangers that lurk in the waste gases, scrubber liquor and bottom and fly ash that comes out of these plants?
If they did not understand the technology, how can they know that their vote is really in the best interests of the area and its population?
Simply taking a short term decision to solve the waste disposal problem by burning it, rather than maximising the use of recycling in the first instance to reduce the volumes that need to go into landfill, points up the total lack of understanding by our ERYC Councillors.
Although the basic decision to adopt incineration has been taken by the ERYC Cabinet, they could still change their decision simply by refusing planning consent to any company wishing to build an incinerator in the East Riding.
Perhaps if councillors had actually incorporated Best Value criteria into their deliberations we would have ended up with an economic mix of disposal methods that protected the environment, the health of the public and allowed the council to keep the volumes of rubbish that has to go into landfill to manageable levels.
Unfortunately, incineration could actually have the effect of reducing the proportion of recycling that takes place because it is simpler to burn it than sort it.
The more waste we burn, the more we pollute our planet, add to global warming and endanger the health of our grandchildrens' grandchildren.
