Is Davyhulme Incinerator Lawful?

Questions are being asked to establish if the granting of planning permission to the controversial Barton Renewable Energy Plant (the Davyhulme Incinerator) is actually lawful.

The Breathe Clean Air Group, Trafford’s clean air watchdog, has written to the Ombudsman to investigate why the Environment Agency granted a permit to the Davyhulme Incinerator, when the EA knew that nitrogen dioxide pollution from the plant, would add to pollution levels which were already over the legal limit.

“The European Commission is prosecuting the United Kingdom for breaches of air pollution standards and this includes nitrogen dioxide,” said Pete Kilvert, BCAG Chairman. “How can the Environment Agency, issue a permit to a plant that will cause even more pollution?”

The proposed Incinerator was given an Environmental Permit by the Environment Agency in October 2012. The permit was not challenged by the Government Planning Inspector, the Secretary of State nor the High Court Judge, even though the evidence was flawed. The Environment Agency accepted Peel Energy’s proposal for nitrogen dioxide emissions, which is unrealistically tighter than any other incinerator in the country. The Incinerator will be allowed to operate without using Best Available Techniques, which is a legal requirement.

BCAG has asked the Ombudsman why this incinerator can be located next to an Air Quality Management Area, and alongside a residential community with schools and recreation facilities, where the safety limit for nitrogen dioxide is already way over the limit.

Pete Kilvert said, “burning waste wood will also produce masses of tiny Particulate Matter, heavy metals such as arsenic and lead, and organic chemicals such as dioxins. Scientists have said that there are major questions about the effect on people’s health, so we must protect our children.”

LETTER TO THE OMBUDSMAN

Dear Ombudsman,

re, BARTON RENEWABLE ENERGY PLANT, DAVYHULME, GREATER MANCHESTER.

I wish to make a complaint and request that you carry out an investigation into the Environment Agency that granted an Environmental Permit to the Barton Renewable Energy Plant (Davyhulme Incinerator) in Davyhulme, Trafford, Greater Manchester.

I am Chairman of the Breathe Clean Air Group, that has been campaigning to stop the building of this waste wood burning incinerator which is to be built in the residential area alongside an Air Quality Management Area in Davyhulme, Trafford, Greater Manchester.

As you may be aware, burning waste wood (impregnated with preservatives such as chromated copper arsenate) and waste plastics will produce dangerous emissions such as Particulate Matter, polyaromatic hydrocarbons, dioxins, heavy metals such as lead and arsenic, nitrogen dioxide and carbon dioxide (a greenhouse gas). Health impacts from this incinerator will include asthma, COPD, cancer, heart attacks, strokes and premature death.

The Barton Renewable Energy Plant has been proposed by Peel Energy, a subsidiary of the Peel Group, Peel Dome, The Trafford Centre, Manchester, M17 8PL

The Local Authority, (Trafford Council) voted unanimously to reject Planning Permission in November 2011.

The Environment Agency granted an Environmental Permit in October 2012.

A Public Inquiry was held in November 2012 and the Inspector reported to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Eric Pickles overruled Trafford Council’s decision in May 2013.

Trafford Council’s Appeal to the High Court was rejected in February 2014.

REQUEST TO THE OMBUDSMAN TO INVESTIGATE THE ENVIRONMENT AGENCY.

I would like you to investigate why the Environment Agency issued an Environmental Permit (in October 2012) when:

1. this was just one month before the Public Inquiry and therefore greatly influenced the Public Inquiry;

2. the plant will NOT use Best Available Techniques. ie it will use an open grate furnace (boiler) which will only operate at 850 degrees C, which is not high enough to destroy toxic chemicals such as dioxin. It will use an out-dated bag-filtration system to filter out emissions, which will not capture PM 2.5 and PM1 Particulates. (The EA did not request scrubbers or electrostatic precipitators). It will be allowed to have a chimney stack only half the height it should be because it is close to a small aerodrome;

3. the calculations for the amount of nitrogen dioxide that will be produced was flawed. The proposer used a graph provided by a Furnace manufacturer based on flimsy evidence. The EA put a limit on the amount of nitrogen dioxide that could be emitted which is impossible to achieve. (If it was achievable, why aren’t other similar plants able to achieve these limits)? The plant is located upwind of an Air Quality Management Area where the safety limit (40 ug per cubic metre) is already well exceeded. Other developments to be built nearby and the subsequent traffic will also contribute to higher levels of nitrogen dioxide;

4. the Environment Agency did not measure air pollution in the area; does not measure emissions at Incinerator plants; and does not carry out unannounced monitoring visits at incinerators;

5. the EA was aware of planning permission given to other nearby polluting processes such as 5 biogas engines at the adjacent United Utilities Wastewater Treatment Facility; an 880 MegaWatt, gas fired power station at Carrington (now raised to 2,150 MW), about 4 miles upwind of the Davyhulme Incinerator site; proposals for Port Salford on the opposite side of the Manchester Ship Canal; and proximity to the M60 motorway;

6. the EA knew that Peel Energy had quoted air pollution figures from air monitoring stations that were NOT the closest and most appropriate sites.

ALSO, I would like you to investigate whether money changed hands in order for the developer to acquire an Environmental Permit.

Should you decide to investigate this complaint I would be pleased to provide more detail and more evidence.

Many thanks. Yours sincerely, Peter Kilvert, Chairman, Breathe Clean Air Group