By John Cox,
What happens to the domestic waste we all throw away? This week, Barnet and the other boroughs in north London have published their waste plan (www.nlwp.net/) for the Government, which will apply "for the next 25 to 35 years."
Barnet does not say the plan will last that long, but the separate 'North London Waste Authority' (NLWA - www.nlwa.gov.uk) has admitted this, at its exhibition on the incinerator-fuel plant on the edge of Friern Barnet (at Pinkham Way). The NLWA says it "must" sign very long-term contracts with the incinerator companies.
Barnet's representatives on the NLWA are Councillors Melvin Cohen and Brian Coleman AM.
The NLWA wants all the black bag waste from the seven London boroughs to go to Pinkham Way, and to a rebuilt plant at Edmonton. Both those sites would heat the waste, to create incinerator fuel, and this would then be shipped in large lorries around the North Circular, to the Brent Cross Incinerator and rail-head.
Our Council also demands that Pinkham Wood in Haringey is destroyed for a second reason – so it can sell the current dustcart site in Mill Hill East for housing, and build a new one in a different borough! But the idea of new incinerators for domestic waste, until maybe the year 2046, is a complete disaster in any case.
The NLWA will only consider deals that burn our waste, even though it's hazardous, inefficient as a source of energy, and a huge waste of resources. We can't continue to extract material from the ground, use it, but then dispose of it by landfill or incineration, for evermore.
Unlike the global-warming battle (between ‘Climate Change Deniers’ and ‘Warmists’, in the Daily Telegraph for instance) no-one really argues against conserving materials. Our planet needs a largely closed circle of repair, reuse, recycling, and a vast reduction in domestic waste quantities, if it is to have a future. Only quarrying, oil-extraction (for plastics), and incinerator companies disagree.
We can create thousands of new jobs in design and recycling, so that products last longer, and can be dismantled at end of use. We need political consensus, because of the long-term changes. This is new, and welcome, private-sector economic activity, of course.
These changes go beyond ridiculous stories in the Daily Mail on waste collection. For this new vision, we should look to a far-away country of which we know little – Scotland.
North of the Border has the only Government-based 'Zero Waste' policy in the world (www.zerowastescotland.org.uk/). ('Zero Waste' is a policy - we will never fully get there.) Scotland may fudge on some incineration, but it is demanding major industrial changes, with much lower waste quantities and 70% recycling by 2025, much better than unambitious north London targets.
Councillor Clyde Loakes, Chair of the NLWA, should stop pretending how wonderful the Pinkham Wood depot would be (neglecting the open-air Barnet dustcart ‘necklace’ around it). He should tell us why we NEED to burn London’s waste for a whole generation, even with his appealing names like ‘gasifier’, 'recovery', and ‘Energy from Waste’.
He will know that plastics and paper must be left in incinerator fuel for it to burn. Supplies for furnaces must be guaranteed, or council tax payers will be 'fined'. The NLWA will sign very long-term contracts of £4-BILLION-pounds, even riskier than Gordon Brown’s London Underground maintenance disasters.
Who wants this lead story in the local papers in the 2020’s (read it on your iPad 9):
We don't need the current Pinkham Way plan. So, Councillors Loakes, Cohen, and Coleman:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Cox is an environmental campaigner who lives in North West London. Guest blogs are always welcome at the Barnet Eye
What happens to the domestic waste we all throw away? This week, Barnet and the other boroughs in north London have published their waste plan (www.nlwp.net/) for the Government, which will apply "for the next 25 to 35 years."
Barnet does not say the plan will last that long, but the separate 'North London Waste Authority' (NLWA - www.nlwa.gov.uk) has admitted this, at its exhibition on the incinerator-fuel plant on the edge of Friern Barnet (at Pinkham Way). The NLWA says it "must" sign very long-term contracts with the incinerator companies.
Barnet's representatives on the NLWA are Councillors Melvin Cohen and Brian Coleman AM.
The NLWA wants all the black bag waste from the seven London boroughs to go to Pinkham Way, and to a rebuilt plant at Edmonton. Both those sites would heat the waste, to create incinerator fuel, and this would then be shipped in large lorries around the North Circular, to the Brent Cross Incinerator and rail-head.
 |
| The Mill Hill East depot |
The NLWA will only consider deals that burn our waste, even though it's hazardous, inefficient as a source of energy, and a huge waste of resources. We can't continue to extract material from the ground, use it, but then dispose of it by landfill or incineration, for evermore.
Unlike the global-warming battle (between ‘Climate Change Deniers’ and ‘Warmists’, in the Daily Telegraph for instance) no-one really argues against conserving materials. Our planet needs a largely closed circle of repair, reuse, recycling, and a vast reduction in domestic waste quantities, if it is to have a future. Only quarrying, oil-extraction (for plastics), and incinerator companies disagree.
We can create thousands of new jobs in design and recycling, so that products last longer, and can be dismantled at end of use. We need political consensus, because of the long-term changes. This is new, and welcome, private-sector economic activity, of course.
These changes go beyond ridiculous stories in the Daily Mail on waste collection. For this new vision, we should look to a far-away country of which we know little – Scotland.
North of the Border has the only Government-based 'Zero Waste' policy in the world (www.zerowastescotland.org.uk/). ('Zero Waste' is a policy - we will never fully get there.) Scotland may fudge on some incineration, but it is demanding major industrial changes, with much lower waste quantities and 70% recycling by 2025, much better than unambitious north London targets.
Councillor Clyde Loakes, Chair of the NLWA, should stop pretending how wonderful the Pinkham Wood depot would be (neglecting the open-air Barnet dustcart ‘necklace’ around it). He should tell us why we NEED to burn London’s waste for a whole generation, even with his appealing names like ‘gasifier’, 'recovery', and ‘Energy from Waste’.
He will know that plastics and paper must be left in incinerator fuel for it to burn. Supplies for furnaces must be guaranteed, or council tax payers will be 'fined'. The NLWA will sign very long-term contracts of £4-BILLION-pounds, even riskier than Gordon Brown’s London Underground maintenance disasters.
 |
| Pinkham Wood, next to the North Circular |
Who wants this lead story in the local papers in the 2020’s (read it on your iPad 9):
"Ten years ago, the authority signed a 25-year deal to provide waste to burn. But what was seen as a cash-saver has quickly turned into a money-pit, as the authority is forced to send increasingly valuable recyclable material to the incinerator, in order to meet its annual quota. The incinerator has been dogged by controversy, due to high levels of flies and foul odours."That exact quote applies ALREADY to Kent County Council. There are further examples around the UK.
We don't need the current Pinkham Way plan. So, Councillors Loakes, Cohen, and Coleman:
- Why not try to halve black-bag waste by 2020?
- Why not aim for 70% recycling by 2025?
- Why not extend existing contracts meanwhile, with an independent audit?
- Why are your new incinerators (a distortion of the intention of the landfill tax) your ONLY option?
- Why not show better leadership, and go for 'Zero Waste' in north London instead?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Cox is an environmental campaigner who lives in North West London. Guest blogs are always welcome at the Barnet Eye
