The saga of this untried, untested, unnecessary and unwanted monstrosity lumbers on, with Surrey County Council (SCC) brushing aside valid technical objections. Delays to the planning process have, however, caused the contractor to call for a revision of the pricing and construction timetable. This, in turn, has made SCC revisit affordability and value for money aspects. Unfortunately this value for money examination was carried out behind closed doors, despite many relevant questions posed by LOSRA and Spelthorne Against the Eco Park (SATEP) members.
The value for money report was reviewed by SCC’s Cabinet on 28th April and passed, despite the estimated cost rocketing by £16M in the past 18 months. LOSRA and SATEP believe that there are simpler and cheaper methods of disposing of waste, and so does the contractor SITA! Watch:
SCC and SITA, its waste consultants, are still insisting that the technology is ‘gasification’ despite Ofgem’s definition that it can’t possibly be. Two possible reasons for this stubbornness; if the definition is changed to incineration rather than gasification the original planning consent is void and the whole thing goes back to the beginning, and gasification attracts three times the subsidy for electricity generation over straightforward incineration (think windfarms and solar panels). Gasification is the Holy Grail of the waste disposal business, and at present it’s just as unattainable especially on a site as small as the Community Recycling Centre at Charlton Lane.
Click here to read a recent Private Eye article giving a whistleblower's account on the monitoring of highly toxic particulate emissions caused by incineration.
