Complaint 1: The name ‘Eco Park’
SBC, SCC and SITA have named the proposed development an Eco Park.
Point No.1: The incinerator flies in the face of being ‘Eco’ due to the environmentally destructive greenhouse gas and CO2 emissions it will create along with a number of harmful pollutants, named in the SITA Scoping Report of June 2010 as being:-
- Nitrogen oxide and nitrogen dioxide (known as NOx)
- Sulphur dioxide
- Carbon monoxide
- Hydrogen chloride
- Hydrogen fluoride
- Volatile organic compounds
- Particulate matter
- Dioxins and furans
- Heavy metals
Point No.2: Trucking in black bin waste from all over Surrey to the north of county is not Eco. Spelthorne is already an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA). Discouraging vehicle movements in the zone would be Eco, not the other way around.
Complaint 2: Proven Technology Claims
In the SITA October Newsletter they claim that other incinerators are “all operating successfully and emissions are within predicted levels”.
Point No. 1: The proposed incinerator for Shepperton would be untried, untested prototype. As such it cannot be tested until it is built, and they cannot know that it would function successfully until it is in operation.
Point No. 2: Emissions from similarly built incinerators experience frequent breaches. (The ASA were sent a summary of all known breaches that are known to have occurred in the UK and Iceland over the past 12 months, including data on the Dumfries site that incurs a breach, on average, every other day of operation).
Complaint 3: Incinerator, not Gasifier
SBC, SCC and SITA have consistently referred to the incinerator as a Batch Oxidation System Gasifer.
Point: The Councils and SITA have been consistently dishonest about not calling the gasifier an incinerator. By DEFRA definition and in current EU Legislation, a BOS Gasifier IS an incinerator with gasification being just part of the process.
Complaint 4: Deceptive Drawings
In the August and October SITA Newsletters, contrasting artistic impressions of the proposed development are shown.
Point: No published artistic impression has revealed the true height of the chimney being proposed. This will create the most negative visual impact and, as it is so singularly significant, it should not be consistently omitted from publications.
Please visit http://www.satep.moonfruit.com/ to keep up with all the latest 'Eco Park' news, to sign the petition and/or make a donation; and to see what action you can take to prevent the construction of this misconceived blight on the local community.