Norfolk’s Proposed Waste Incinerator

Henry Bellingham MP debates the proposed Incinerator at Westminster Hall.

• Henry Bellingham MP tells Parliament a rival bidder would have been £46M cheaper for Norfolk's Taxpayers.

• Why did officers make a last minute change of their recommendation to favour the more costly bidder?

• Why was a £20M planning failure clause signed after the applicant had already decided to apply for planning permission?

Planning Committee Locality

It came as no surprise when the same Council officers who proposed the incinerator, recommended it gets planning approval.
Look at the map to see how democratic representation on the planning committee was abandoned. The Dept for Communities and Local Government prefer planning decisions to be made locally...
How is this Local?

The nearest planner lives 25 miles away from the proposed incinerator.
The Council’s determination to award planning permission for its own project is not in any doubt. Planners also know the Council is committed to pay £20M compensation to the developer if planning is not awarded.

Leaked Documents

Leaked strategy document extracts. Norfolk County Council made false claims against the official incinerator ballot, along with DEFRA they supported a strategy to “undermine its moral value”.
Click to see Leaked Document

First Americans, now Europeans lose their appetite for building incinerators.

In the 1990s Americans realised EfW incinerators were costly and inefficient profiting developers at taxpayer’s expense. A Wall Street Journal article by Jeff Bailey 11th August 1993 illustrates the point. Parallels with present day UK are striking, lessons should be learnt instead of mistakes repeated. Since a 2009 report on incinerators in Germany it looks as though they ‘learnt the hard way’. The German Government does not intend to build any further EfW incinerators.
See Wall Street Article...

A working ‘modern’ incinerator (Stoke 2005). The constant plume of fine particles is usually invisible to the naked eye.

Aerial View, Location Matters.
Click Image for Full Size.

Campaign over view and objective

We understand Norfolk must reduce its dependency on landfill and support the County Council in seeking a better solution. We disagree with the Council’s choice of technology. There are proven technologies better than incineration offering the necessary reductions in landfill without polluting the air and surrounding farmland. The local population will have to live with the consequences and therefore we demand a say in which solution is used. The impacts on health, transport and the local economy make incineration unacceptable. Only an environmentally responsible solution is acceptable such as Anaerobic Digestion, Mechanical and Biological Treatment, Autoclave and Advanced Composting. The only thermal treatment that should even be considered is Plasma Gasification. It is our objective that Norfolk’s waste is treated in the safest and most environmentally responsible manner, which minimises its impact on peoples health and the environment.

Environmental Consultant investigates incinerator ballot result

Latest Campaign Flyer