Council won't rule out giant incinerator plan for Avonmouth
A giant new incinerator is still a possibility for Avonmouth following a heated debate at Bristol's Council House last night.
No decision will be taken on a technological solution to the West of England's waste problems for two years.
But an incinerator remains on the list of options after an angry city council debate lasting nearly three hours.
Opposition Liberal Democrat councillors failed by 28 votes to 34 to get the authority to drop the idea.
Instead, the hung council's Labour leadership – which some expected to give up power if its flagship waste policy had been voted down – lived to fight another day.
The waste policy it shares with partner councils in North Somerset and South Gloucestershire remains intact.
But the 70-member council's 13 Tories expressed grave concerns about an incinerator. And their amendment to beef up scrutiny of Labour's decisions on waste was accepted by the ruling party.
In the end, Conservative councillor, Spud Murphy, of Avonmouth, was one of just two councillors to abstain in the vote on the Lib Dems' motion.
The 31-member Lib Dem group – which favours alternatives for dealing with the West's waste they say are cheaper and cleaner – had four members absent, including St Paul's councillor, Shirley Marshall, whose long absence from meetings earlier this year was controversial.
The council's one Green councillor, Charlie Bolton, voted with 27 Lib Dems.
They were opposed by 34 Tory and Labour councillors. Labour currently has just 24 councillors following the recent death of St George West councillor John Deasy.
Mr Murphy warned of "poisonous fumes blowing up the Bristol Channel" towards Avonmouth, Shirehampton, Easter Compton, Pilning and other areas if an incinerator was eventually the chosen option to dispose of the waste the West cannot recycle.
And his leader, Councillor Richard Eddy (Bishopsworth), warned the council against "rushing" into a long-term decision.
He said the council was in danger of "sleepwalking into a poor decision we might live to regret".
His deputy, Geoff Gollop, said a majority of the council was "opposed to a 'feed-the-beast' mass- burn incinerator".
But Mr Eddy and his party did not vote to throw out the policy, which includes an application to the Government next month for up to £80 million of public funding for the West's long-term waste treatment needs.
Instead, with Labour backing, they pushed through an amendment calling for "rigorous financial assessment" before any technology option was selected.
A small, all-party working group will be set up to look at ways to achieve greater cuts in the amount of waste households throw out.
A full outline business case will be referred to one of the council's scrutiny commissions on October 23, before a meeting of the ruling Labour cabinet on October 30.
The bid for Private Finance Initiative (PFI) cash has to be in by October 31. Labour's finance chief, Councillor John Bees, said all options – including an incinerator – needed to be kept open.
14 Comments
View all
by Jo, Bristol
Saturday, September 27 2008, 2:18PM
“As with all things, there's no one sollution for waste disposal, a number of measures are required for sustainable watse manegment. Obviously lean production being used in manufactuing processes to reduce waste being produced in the first place would be nice to see and re-use and recycling of waste where possible is also good (but not without their own energy requirments and pollution). Incineration is a good way for reducing burden on landfill, we are only a small island and have limitted space, as long as appropriate emissions abatement equipment is used, which I am sure it would be as it is a legislative requirement. It would be good to see the energy produced by the plant utilised for electricty production.”
by Mark Stuart, Fishponds
Friday, September 12 2008, 2:08PM
“It¿s interesting to see how many self-appointed experts there are when it comes to criticising contemporary clean-burn incinerators.
Let¿s cut through all the misleading claims and look at the basic facts. The local authorities have commissioned a team of people to explore ways in which we can deal with our future waste as efficiently and economically as possible. Over a period of months - and at considerable expense - that team consulted experts in the field on which systems are available, the strengths and pitfalls of each system and the likely cost implications. They then come to a conclusion that recommends a modern incinerator as the safest and most economical way forward.
Now I agree that it is dangerous to put all your faith in experts, but when it comes to choosing between the ideas put forward by Friends of the Earth (everything has to be recycled), the Lib Dems (we support anything that will help to bring down the Council) and international waste experts, I think I know where to put my trust.”
by Pete, South Bristol
Wednesday, September 10 2008, 10:47PM
“I think you're getting us mixed up with David Cameron, Mark.
Looks like the Bristol Tories are desperate to look as green as their leader tries to - but last night they finished up with a 'greenwash' statement that was the opposite of what they'd done a few minutes before.
Oh, and I DO know how an incinerator works. And I know its faults.”
by Mark, South Glos
Wednesday, September 10 2008, 4:05PM
“DO any of you drongos actualy know how these incerators work!
Green Credentials! You'd buy a cheap chinese made windmill, made in some factory that pours out toxic waste and tout your green credentials! What BULL you all talk.”
by Pete, south Bristol
Wednesday, September 10 2008, 2:46PM
“Before the debate, my Tory councillor reassured me: "As a group, my party, are voting against the incinerator and I am more than happy to join them."
Lets be charitable and assume he believed it himself at the time. What happened then to make the Tories go back on their word? You can bet it had nothing to do with incineration!”
by Pete, South Bristol
Wednesday, September 10 2008, 2:42PM
“Before the debate, my Tory councillor reassured me that "As a group, my party are voting against the incinerator and I am more than happy to join them."
Lets be charitable - perhaps he even believed it at the time. I wonder what politicking agenda made the Tories go back on their word. You can bet it was nothing to do with incineration.”
by Glenn Vowles, Knowle, Bristol
Wednesday, September 10 2008, 1:21PM
“A Labour-Tory pact to keep alive the prospect of a mass incinerator for Bristol. Bang goes both their green credentials then (not that they had much green credibility to start with!!).”
by Mark, South Glos
Wednesday, September 10 2008, 12:33PM
“The thing I love about NIMBYs is invarialy they are so ignorant! This will be a clean incinerator with high levels of filtration so nominal polution. The only fault I have with the plan is it will not be linked to power generation (which I believe every small town should have!). Recycling will not deal with all our waste issues. The other thing is this will reduce a lot of emissions, since our waste will not be carted half across the country to land fills in East Anglia!”
by Jon, Horfield
Wednesday, September 10 2008, 9:55AM
“All this talk fails to find someone with a viable answer, everyone likes to protest, if that energy and gas was put to solving the problem, great.
The present system will never work, because the cost of making it work is prohibitive.”
by F Wright, Bristol
Wednesday, September 10 2008, 9:38AM
“David from Bishopston is totally wrong. Not only is it not true that the European countries with high recycling rates "rely" on incineration; but in fact incinerators NEED the very material that is best for recycling in order to function. They needs stuff like paper, wood, food and plastic, otherwise the burn cannot be sustained. In incinerator filled only with scraps of broken bottles, the odd can, and bits of broken machines wouldnt work.”