Concerns over new waste plant for town

filler 2 e1403010542102

Fears that a new waste recycling plant in Eastleigh could lead to air pollution and a nasty pong has caused one concerned Eastleigh resident to call on townsfolk to lobby the Environment Agency who are considering an application for an environmental permit.

Simon Payne, who lives on Southampton Rd, believes the new waste recycling plant shouldn’t be built at Chickenhall Lane because it is too close to the town centre even though Hampshire County Council have given planning permission to the operators Clean Power.

Mr. Payne warns that up to 64 HGV lorries a day would be needed to transport the waste which would not necessarily be local and might not even come from Hampshire .

The plant will have two 80 foot high chimneys, which say clean power, will emit just water vapor and a small amount of carbon dioxide but Mr. Payne says at other similar locations there have been slight Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2 ) emissions.

Similar emissions in Eastleigh would, he says, have a detrimental effect on NO2 levels in the town’s Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA) where they are already a concern.

Clean power say the centre would produce around 15MW of renewable electricity, supplying enough energy to be able power around 10,000 homes.

This would be produced from three sources:

  • a 12MW pyrolysis Advanced Conversion Technology (ACT) plant (which is designed to burn waste ‘cleanly ‘as opposed to a traditional incinerator)
  • a 2MW anaerobic digestion (AD) unit
  • a 1MW solar panel array.

Clean Power argue the plant will create 30 jobs and that the waste would be non-hazardous.

In a press statement to Eastleigh News Clean Power said

The approved plans are extremely well located and have been designed to the highest standards. No waste will be stored on site and all processing will take place indoors in a sealed environment, preventing noise and smells.

Clean power also stated they would try to limit traffic movement during peak hours and Eastleigh News understands they are making a contribution towards traffic management improvement in Bishopstoke Road.

They told Eastleigh News:

The Local Highway Authority and the Highways Agency were consulted ahead of the County Council’s decision and extensive studies highlighted that there would be no adverse transport impacts from the servicing of the centre.

On Thursday Simon Payne addressed the Eastleigh Borough Council Cabinet telling them that since an AQMA had been declared on Southampton Rd in 2005 the NO2 levels had only ever reached a low of 50 micrograms against a recommended maximum  of 40.

“Air pollution causes around 29,000 premature deaths every year in the UK and our town is failing to meet the standard. More development is planned for this area, housing expansion and the development of Eastleigh Riverside all these have potential adverse impacts on air quality.

The ultimate solution would be a Chickenhall Lane relief road but this is unlikely.

There will be an impact from 128 HGV movements a day down Southampton Rd and Leigh Rd.

There will still be emissions from the plant that although filtered will still raise NO2 levels from the plant.

At some other locations this is between 0.3 to 0.5 of a milligram.

The other risk from the site is odour, this is from the plant itself and also from the vehicles bringing in the waste.

Anaerobic digesters are one of the biggest sources of pollution according to the Environment Agency if they go wrong there will be odour and also a spillage of silage and the Itchen SSI site is close by.

There have been seven catastrophic plant failures from March to November 2013 – two of which were explosive.

I urge the council to look at this again in detail as the site has the potential to impact on the health and amenity of residents and workers in Eastleigh town centre and Bishopstoke.”

Council leader and Cabinet Chair Keith House told Mr. Payne that there was little that Eastleigh Borough Council could do:

“We have just about no role in this”

He explained, that waste planning applications were decided by Hampshire County Council and permits granted by the Environment Agency.

After the meeting Simon Payne told Eastleigh News he felt Eastleigh Borough Council should consider asking for a judicial review into the planning application.

He also called on concerned residents to research the subject and to respond to the EA consultation by June 30.

Mr Payne said that similar schemes elsewhere in the UK had met with strong local opposition but there had been very little dissent in the town which he attributed to a lack of publicity – he felt the council should have done more to highlight the issues to residents.

A spokesman for Clean Power said:

“Our approved plans are a great way to prevent locally produced waste from going to landfill or incineration and to generate renewable electricity and heat.

Our centre will also create a significant number of full-time employment opportunities for local people and we have been delighted with the extremely positive response to our proposals so far.”

Clean Power has a website outlining details and benefits of their proposed energy farm here

A pressure group site which list drawbacks and concerns with energy recovery using pyrolysis and anaerobic digesters can be found here

The environment agency page with details on how to comment on the application can be found here


  13 comments for “Concerns over new waste plant for town

  1. gavin
    June 17, 2014 at 3:33 pm

    Typical slopey shouldered response form House, when will our local council stand up for Eastleigh’s residents instead of ignoring their legitimate concerns? Probably the same time that the Pope becomes protestant!!

  2. stu
    June 18, 2014 at 7:55 am

    Agreed. A pathetic response. Simon Payne seems to be doing something about it and I would guess he has less power and influence than the supposed “council leader and cabinet chair”.

  3. Paul
    June 19, 2014 at 6:58 pm
  4. Rigel
    June 21, 2014 at 2:02 pm

    well EBC does have a role because I presume it is our ‘recycling’ and refuse that they collect which will be burnt…. i mean pyrolised (which is like making charcoal)

    and there will be an increased output of CO2 – for which EBC has daft targets to reduce.

    Air quality is fine , that 29000 premature deaths stat is bogus

    – look

    ,it is an estimate .If you went to beijing or the brixton road you would find some air pollution but in eastleigh we are lucky. Bear in mind 30,000 people die every day from malnutrition and preventable diseases , not die a little earlier than they would have , actually die.

    I don’t have a problem with this , not pretty but required ,they should allow an 80ft tower block next to it which is heated for free and can house 500 people

    -of course it should be on the front of the ‘borough news’ thanks for getting the story out guys !

    • mm
      Eastleigh Xpress
      June 21, 2014 at 3:28 pm

      I don’t think it will be ‘our’ waste – EBC have contracts elsewhere for that – Veolia perhaps? – and there is some confusion as to what type of waste actually will be ‘burnt’ or ‘cooked’ perhaps is a more accurate description.
      Not sure what ‘healthy can tell me about the soot deposits that cover my windows – perhaps I should get the stuff analysed.

      • Rigel
        June 22, 2014 at 8:53 am

        if you live near a road /rail it’s probably particulates, mostly from old diesel engines plus some brake pads – check out the age of the bus in front of you or the loco now and again because anything over 25 yrs old shouldnt really be working all day – Emission tests are in the MOT which you can see online !
        you could say that Pollen is even more damaging to health causing, I estimate, 30,000 premature deaths to asthmatics per year – what do we do chop all the trees down.

        where does our waste go then ?

        • mm
          Eastleigh Xpress
          June 22, 2014 at 10:02 am

          Yes, certainly an extra 128 HGV vehicle movements a day, 365 days a year delivering waste to the facility won’t do a lot for the air quality in Eastleigh Town Centre which EBC are committed to improving – partly by working on reducing HGV movements.
          Another source of pollution is air traffic landing/taking off from the airport though this has lessened recently.
          Even the waste facility operators Clean Power agree the new facility won’t improve air quality.
          It is no where near as ‘dirty’ as a conventional incinerator and there are filters in the chimneys but residents at other locations report ‘fly ash’ escaping – toxic stuff by all accounts.
          I do wonder about the claimed energy output – is this net?
          I mean energy must be expended to heat up the waste to carbonise it – energy is also used by trucks collecting the rubbish and then transporting it.
          How much energy is used to produce energy?
          If the cost of energy came down – say due to cheap gas from fracking – and government took the subsidies away..would this still be viable?
          I agree, rubbish has to be disposed of and this is a solution to landfill but is a high density population area which already has an air quality issue really the best location?
          As I am sure you already know Rigel, around a 1,000 asthmatics die in UK from all triggers, not 30,000 but the number of asthma sufferers is much higher and the number of people with severe respiratory complaints like emphysema higher still.
          An epidemiological study showing distribution of Asthma sufferers in Eastleigh might be interesting.

  5. Rosie
    June 22, 2014 at 12:59 am

    I’m surprised the whole of the Borough isn’t an air quality management area already as it’s hard to find somewhere to breathe in clean air on a daily basis. If it’s not traffic fumes from the M27, A27, etc, it’s “Fawley fallout”, Marchwood incinerator smells/fallout (?) and smoke from the ever-present bonfires in this area. I’m surprised we’re not all on inhalers or oxygen (though we probably will be in later life)! Perhaps the new waste centre is to cope with the thousands of new houses that EBC are planning to build on the countryside at Boorley Green and Bursledon? The waste will have to go somewhere and the Lib Dems will have built on the countryside so won’t be able to use that for landfill(though I suppose all the Hamble Lane “scrub” land and car boot sale site could be used for landfill …). Also, once the new houses are built, a high proportion will be sold to commuters (including Londoners wanting to move out of London for cheaper housing,but commute back in to work) so the air quality here will be even worse. Plus thousands more houses that Fareham, Southampton and Portsmouth councils are building, so the new waste plant could, presumably be for some of that new housing too?

  6. Rigel
    June 22, 2014 at 10:24 pm

    Rosie , if you want to breath clean air go to the beach if you can , admittedly you can be on the beach and downwind of fawley but remember these things seem worse in the summer because of atmospheric conditions, in the heat the lower layers of air don’t get mixed up so much , i used to live on the hackney road in London trust me the air here is much better.

    I am against all housing estates on greenfield sites but few people have the time to put up a fight , if you want to stop them get in touch.

    • mm
      Eastleigh Xpress
      June 23, 2014 at 1:16 am

      I’m sure the air quality is much better on the aviary estate then it is in the Eastleigh town centre AQMA.
      The AQMA is being extended and letters go out to householders affected next week – I’d be very surprised if you get one.

  7. Saints 73
    June 28, 2014 at 10:48 am

    The AQMA public meeting is on Thursday 3rd July 6pm-8pm at the point. The details are on the Eastleigh BC website

    In the application for this waste incinerator (I use the word incinerator as it is used by the Environment Agency in the permit for this site) 64 HGVs in a day and 64 out a day and all of them have to go through the AQMA as it now starts just past Chickenhall Lane.

    Also on the application details is the list of feedstocks. This includes Wastes from Natal Care and Wastes from Research, Diagnosis,Treatment of Prevention of Disease involving Animals. (This detail is on the Application CD provided by the EA and also available from Eastleigh BC at Eastleigh House – I have checked the EA site this morning and there is no notification that this list has been amended since the application)

  8. Sam
    July 5, 2014 at 1:50 am

    Sam Snook
    5days a week our roads are polluted by heavy lorries that crawl into Southampton Road-Twyford Road-Leigh Road -Passfield, Chestnut Ave-and Woodside Ave. Might I suggest that people talking outside the paddling pool at Passfield Ave and have children in push chairs stand back you could be putting your children at risk.

  9. July 7, 2014 at 11:38 am

    For the avoidance of doubt: UKWIN opposes the Eastleigh incinerator and incineration in general, but it does not campaign against Anaerobic Digestion.

Comments are closed.