SPIN V. FACTS
What LRV Says | The Facts |
The Incinerator Project Team | |
“Our team at (LRV) is driven by a group of local experts, with years of experience in waste management.” (Brian Kilgour maildrop 28/12/10) | None of the LRV top team has any experience of industrial scale processing proposed for the incinerator. Only one can claim to have a technical background in terms of waste incineration but the main project he has worked on has not even been built yet and is nowhere near the scale of LRV. Brian Kilgour’s previous waste management experience is in using heavy vehicles to move waste to landfill and other sites and he has been prosecuted by SEPA for a waste offence. |
Traffic impact | |
“The site has good access to the M77 and surrounding road networks, so the project would not require vehicles to pass through the town. These vehicles are already on the road network somewhere carrying waste...” (Brian Kilgour maildrop 28/12/10) “Q. Will this mean lots of extra traffic and lorries? A. We aren't creating any extra waste, so all of these lorries will already be on the road network somewhere. However we are minded that the Lifetime Recycling Village will mean that they are more concentrated. So, to address this, we will ensure that truck movements are phased throughout the day and night and reduced at peak times to minimise impact, using only an agreed routing pattern.” (LRV website FAQs) | The “surrounding road network” happens to be most of the main roads in East Renfrewshire. Given that one rubbish-laden vehicle will be making its way to the site every three minutes, 24 hours a day from the entire central belt of Scotland, previous experience makes it impossible to believe that these will all remain on the M77 – HGV drivers will go wherever take them to the site in the quickest time. These trucks may well already be on the road network but they are currently going to multiple sites local to the waste’s point of origin. They are not all converging on one site. By coming to LRV more energy in the form of fuel will be used and pollution in the form of diesel particulates and fumes will be spewed out and concentrated around our communities and schools. LRV have so far not produced any data to indicate how much extra pollution these heavy trucks will generate within East Renfrewshire and South Glasgow. |
Choice of Location | |
“We conducted a thorough search of Scotland to find the right location for the Lifetime Recycling Village before choosing this site, away from built up areas and close to good transport links.” (LRV website) “Our design approach for the Recycling Village places central importance on creating a green, landscaped environment, which will fit naturally into the surrounding area and be a pleasant site to work in.” (LRV website) “Q. Where is it? A. The proposed location for the Lifetime Recycling Village is away from built up areas and well connected to major road networks. We conducted a thorough search of the west of Scotland, the area we intend to serve, before deciding on this site and we will develop our proposals to sit sympathetically in the local landscape.” (LRV website FAQs) | LRV did indeed look at other sites. However, the case of the Eurocentral park in Lanarkshire it appears they were rebuffed because the area is zoned as a business park rather that deciding themselves it wasn’t suitable. East Renfrewshire was not LRV’s first choice and the main reason for choosing the area seems to be the fact that Brian Kilgour was able to buy land here. The artist’s impressions of the incinerator have been deliberately presented as oblique, aerial views to show how the grass covered roof will blend in with the local countryside. Most residents will not be passing the site in an aeroplane. Local people will see massive furnace halls up to 100 foot high and topped with fourteen 200 foot chimneys, taking the overall height of the structure up to 300 feet – it will be visible from many miles away and will look like what it is – a massive industrial processing plant. The site is only a mile and a half from the largest primary school in the country; emissions from the site and from vehicles making their way there will drift in the prevailing winds over most of East Renfrewshire and South Glasgow resulting in a constant drizzle of airborne waste substances falling on a huge population of residents with incalculable effects on their long-term health. The map published by LRV shows residential areas to be at least half a mile further way from the incinerator site than they actually are. |
Effects on Health | |
“Q. Is it a health risk? A. Absolutely not, there is no risk to anyone's health with this project and we will invest in the latest equipment and abide by the most stringent regulations. This process is cleaner than incineration, which in itself has already been cleared of the need for public health inspections around modern plants operating to European standards as the risk to health is ‘so small that it would be indetectable.’ “ (LRV website FAQs) | Firstly, there is no such word as “indetectable”. “Gasification facilities share the same environmental problems associated with mass burn incinerators including: · Air pollution · Water pollution · Disposal of ash and other by-products · Large amounts of water for cooling purposes · Health, safety, and odor impacts · Disincentives for waste reduction · Diversion of waste from composting and recycling The gas produced from municipal solid waste contains hazardous organic compounds but the technology to remove these toxins does not exist on a commercial scale. The ash which remains after gasification, 8% to 15% of the original volume, is toxic and presents special problems because of the acidic, or low pH, conditions in landfills. Leaching of toxic metals cadmium, lead, and mercury occurs more rapidly at low pH, resulting in contaminated groundwater.” (Waste Gasification Impacts on the Environment and Public Health, Technical Report published by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, 2009) |
Sources of Waste | |
"There will be no municipal waste whatsoever (taken onto the site)... All waste onsite will be commercial (not domestic) waste." (Willy Findlater, LRV in verbal statements to ERC elected members and officers, 16/02/11) | (The waste LRV will process will be) "derived from all sectors in the West of Scotland...the source of the waste material is to be municipal, general and commercial wastes produced in the Greater Glasgow area." (LRV Project Specification, November 2010, obtained from East Renfrewshire Council via the Freedom of Information Act) |
Level of Recycling | |
“The primary business aim of Lifetime Recycling Village Ltd is exemplary waste recycling.” (Brian Kilgour letter to the Evening Times 22/12/10) “A spokeswoman said: "Lifetime Recycling Village is driven by experienced Scottish business people, many of whom have strong roots in the local East Renfrewshire community. The team would bring together innovative sustainable technologies to ensure that 100% of the 1.5 million tonnes of waste that the project would handle annually would be re-used, recycled, recovered and remanufactured." (Eastwood Today, 17/02/11) “Q. Is this simply an incinerator? A. No. The Lifetime Recycling Village is a recycling centre and biomass renewable energy plant, firstly separating useable materials, then creating clean energy, re-useable heat and output products like glass, metals and building blocks, with no pollution.” (LRV website FAQs) | From figures supplied by LRV themselves in their “Scoping Report”, SEPA concluded that they would only actually recycle 5% of the 1.5 million tonnes of rubbish brought to the site and the rest would actually be incinerated. LRV claimed that SEPA had ‘mis-read’ their report and suggested that ‘only’ 60% of the waste would actually be incinerated (900,000 tonnes), contradicting their own earlier claims. Even if one accepts these claims the major part of LRV’s operation will be incineration and it will still be the largest such facility ever built in Europe. |
Pollution and Environment | |
“We think the air to come out of our facility will be cleaner than the air that goes in – after all we will be near a major motorway.” (Willy Findlater, LRV, The Herald, 22/12/10) LRV would “eliminate the need for future landfill” (Brian Kilgour maildrop 28/12/10) “Our technologies would cause no detectable odour or unsightly mess, as all processing would take place within pressure controlled buildings...there would be no risk to anyone’s health from the project...” (Brian Kilgour maildrop 28/12/10) “At Lifetime, we don’t look at this waste as rubbish, but as a valuable product that can be recycled or remanufactured, creating new products and renewable energy to power local homes and businesses.” (LRV website home page) “A Lifetime Recycling Village would bring jobs and investment to the surrounding area, whilst helping Scotland on its way to meeting its carbon reduction targets and realising a cleaner, greener, zero-waste future.” (LRV website home page) “The Recycling Village would be the only facility of its type in Scotland that would completely eliminate the need for future landfill and maximise recycling, whilst creating enough renewable energy to power 100,000 homes” (LRV website) | SNP MSP Stuart Maxwell has confirmed that LRV’s proposals do not meet the best practice and guidance associated with the Government’s ‘Zero Waste’ policy. Although this allows for Energy for Waste incineration, this was foreseen as being on a much smaller, localised scale than proposed by LRV. Given LRV’s claims to be concentrating only on industrial and commercial waste, then their claim to be reducing landfill use does not stack up as this is where most domestic waste ends up. It would appear that LRV’s main strategy is to take commercial and industrial waste away from other, existing locations where it is already being processed, presumably using the vast scale of their operation to undercut other providers, therefore making a nonsense of job-creation claims. At best they may well be simply displacing jobs from other waste management operations, including the long-established and trouble-free Waste Transfer Station a short distance away from their proposed site. A similar incineration plant in Florida employs only 50 people – a long way from LRV’s every-varying claims of 1,000, 750 and 329 jobs created. LRV claim they will generate 56 MegaWatts of electricity for the National Grid. This would only provide 560 Kwh/year per household to 100,000 households. The average household consumption is 4,800 Kwh/year. By contrast, LRV will need to use 37 MegaWatts of electricity simply to power the incinerator and associated plant. The air in most places does not contain dioxins and other particulates in appreciable quantities. ALL incinerators, even those with the most up to date filtration technology, emit those substances. LRV’s operation will generate an incredible level of traffic – one heavy vehicle laden with potentially toxic waste every three minutes 24 hours a day – this will cause an huge increase in localised vehicle emissions. |
Incinerator Technology | |
“Our proposal brings together three tried and tested sustainable processes (advanced recycling, biomass gasification and plasma vitrification), which would not only divert waste from landfill but help to maximise recycling and enhance product development from waste.” (Brian Kilgour maildrop 28/12/10) “Due to its compact and controllable nature, Tetronics’ plasma systems (which will form the plasma vitrification component of LRV) provide unique opportunities for industrial processing. In fact, plasma is one of the cleanest atmospheric thermal processing technologies available and allows Tetronics systems to treat organic and inorganic hazardous wastes, transforming them into substances that are benign to the environment.” (LRV’s Online Blog, 15/03/11) | All three processes are classified by the EU and USA as ‘incineration’. Incineration was banned altogether in Ontario as recently in 1992, in spite of emerging technologies, as it was recognised as simply being an unsustainable, heavily polluting method of dealing with waste. Most of the 900,000 tonnes of rubbish to be burned at LRV will actually be burned in ‘normal’ incinerators (gasification). Twelve of the fourteen 200 foot chimneys on the site would relate to relatively low-tech incineration processes. The as yet substantively unproven (in waste management terms) plasma vitrification process actually only applies to end products after rubbish has already been burned in these ‘old’ gasification furnaces. Most of the burning will not in fact take place at all in the “cleanest atmospheric thermal processing technologies available.” The high technology plasma vitrification process will only be used on the stuff left at the bottom of the low-tech furnaces and other stuff that won’t burn at all and so has to be superheated in LRV’s plasma plant (4,600 sq metres, about 100 feet tall with a 200 ft chimney on top) and turned to hot gas. A considerable drawback of plasma vitrification is that the process must be run constantly on a 24/7 basis. If the chamber cools too much this leads to cracking of the ceramic lining requiring very expensive replacement – such replacement is ideally only carried out every 3 – 5 years. LRV will therefore have to be constantly on the hunt for material they can feed into the chamber in order to keep it running to optimum temperatures. The concern is that this will by necessity include material that would otherwise have been recycled or treated in a less energy-intensive way. |
Employment | |
(LRV would be) “...establishing jobs for over 700 people.” (Brian Kilgour maildrop 28/12/10) “It has been estimated by Fraser of Allander Institute that 328 jobs would be created on the site itself and a further 390 new, permanent jobs as a direct result of the development. During construction more than 3000 jobs in that sector too. Apprenticeships will have a big role to play and are really important to us.” (LRV’s Online Blog, 19/03/11) “In an area where more than 10 per cent of our working age population are on unemployment related benefits, Lifetime's development would bring a massive boost to the community.” (Neil Gallacher, MD of LRV, Letter to the South Glasgow and Eastwood Extra, April 2011) | “There will be 328 jobs in LRV." (Willy Findlater, LRV in verbal statement to ERC elected members and officers, 16/02/11) The contract to design and construct the (as yet) unbuilt Peterborough incinerator frequently cited by LRV as a model, was let to a Malaysian company as the expertise required was not available in the UK. There are concerns that the majority of jobs at LRV will be those simply displaced from the other central belt waste management sites that LRV will have to take business from in order to survive. A similar incinerator plant in Florida, USA only employs 50 people. |
Community Support | |
“Almost 600 people attended public consultation events to share their views and we have since received some very positive responses through the surveys that were filled in...the feedback we receive during this consultation period will play an integral role in shaping our planning application...People are particularly interested in the benefits of the development in terms of job creation, community investment and education. (Neil Gallacher, MD of LRV, Letter to South Glasgow and Eastwood Extra, March 2011) | We only have LRV’s word for this. A survey of 500 local residents carried out by an electoral candidate in May 2011 indicated that 97.8% of those people were totally against LRV’s proposals. If LRV are listening to local feedback as they claim, they should drop their plans immediately. |
Community Benefits | |
“As a further spin-off they (LRV) say a community trust fund, initially worth £250,000, will invest cash in services for local people...” (Eastwood Today, 17/02/11) (LRV will be) “...supporting the establishment of a community trust, with an initial £300,000 to invest in local services - £50,000 of which will be placed into an endowment policy for long-term investment.” (Neil Gallacher, MD of LRV, Letter to South Glasgow and Eastwood Extra, March 2011) “Q. What benefits will this have for the local area? A. The Recycling Village will bring significant employment and investment into the area, creating in the region of 1000 permanent jobs, not including those in construction. Once built The Recycling Village will also be a genuine community resource in itself, with an Education Centre for local children, a Visitor Centre for the general public and a civic amenity waste facility, where families can come and recycle their goods. We will also be donating to a local community trust, to champion excellence in East Renfrewshire and support local causes.” (LRV website FAQs) | £250,000 will not even meet the bill for additional wear and tear on our roads resulting from one heavy vehicle laden with rubbish making its way to LRV every three minutes 24 hours a day. Peterborough Council have imposed a £2,000 levy per journey on the as yet unbuilt incinerator there to cover the costs of road damage. As indicated, there is no evidence to support LRV’s job creation claims and their own statements are contradictory and vary wildly. An equivalent facility in Florida employs only 50 people. No adequate return for blighting local communities and potential affecting their lifestyle and long-term health, as well as local amenities, is being offered. |
Electricity | |
“Our project would create approximately 56 MW of green energy for the national grid, enough to power up to 100,000 homes.” (Neil Gallacher, MD of LRV, Letter to the South Glasgow and Eastwood Extra, April 2011) | UK Government figures show that the average household electricity consumption is 4800 Kilowatts/year. If LRV does generate 56 Megawatts of electricity each year as claimed, it would only be able to contribute 560 Kwh/year per household to 100,000 households. This point must be emphasised – LRV’s incinerator is not ‘green’ and DOES NOT REPRESENT GENERATION OF RENEWABLE ENERGY. It is not clear why LRV think burning rubbish would be ‘green’. The energy used in the original production of the items burned and in their transportation to the incinerator could never be recovered. This ‘lost’ energy is unlikely to outweigh any electricity generated by LRV by a significant factor. Material that could otherwise be recycled and reused is likely to be burned in the incineration process also. |
