« Reply #183 on: March 16, 2010, 08:58:41 AM »
If Danny Fortson's article on page 10 of the Business section of the Sunday Times dated 14.03.2010 is anything to go by, we Hatfield residents could be offered 'financial incentives' in the form of reduced energy bills for not opposing an incinerator on the New Barnfield site.
Looks like bribery to me, and whatever amounts of money are involved, they're likely to be small and will certainly not remove the detrimental impact of the incincerator and its attendant problems on the locality.
The article states that, facing stiff penalties from Brussels for not drastically reducing landfill, 'The government's waste strategy in 2007 estimated that up to 500 new facilities needed to be built to handle rubbish that would otherwise have been tipped into landfill' and 'This equates to having to grant planning permission to about 50 new facilities a year in the run-up to 2020.' If that's what's in the offing, there will no no escape from waste treatment projects being dumped on (or in) residential areas all around the country, and given that the UK's population is set to keep on growing, the problem of rubbish disposal is going to grow too.
The article quotes the success of anaerobic waste disposal plants in Europe, and yet the New Barnfield proposal is for an incinerator. Without knowing what impact such anaerobic plants have on their environment, it seems that would be a better means of waste disposal than incineration. Even so, I doubt public opinion could be swayed to accept ANY waste disposal plant in, or in close proximity to, a residential area, but as the land area of the UK is limited, residents are unlikely to be given much choice over where these plants are sited.
I live within half-a-mile of New Barnfield and certainly don't want one 'on my doorstep' with constant heavy traffic coming and going, let alone any other adverse effects on the neighbourhood.