Greens say Government national guidelines contradict Essex County Council energy from waste claims

27 August 2007

Green councillor calls for council to "start talking facts, not misleading spin"

Essex Green Party says that documents received from defra show that the Government's own national guidelines on waste derived fuels contradict Essex County Council claims on energy from waste.

Since the shock announcement in the spring of its intention to incinerate hundreds of thousands of tonnes of waste per annum, Conservative Essex County Council have made numerous public statements attempting to show that their proposals will deliver "renewable" energy solutions and that the burning process proposed is "clean". This line has been used to brief councillors on district authorities from which the County Council needs agreement in order for its waste PFI proposals to be valid. The same claims have been made in letters and statements to the press by County Council Cabinet members and other Tory County Councillors.

The same claims were also used in the July 2007 issue of essex matters, a 24 page colour magazine sent to households throughout Essex, at taxpayers expense. The essex matters article (pages18 and 19) was under the title "tackling climate change with new energy".

The article claimed that the Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF) output from the council's proposed huge MBT plants at sites in Essex (which could include Basildon and Rivenhall) "produces an output that contains a very rich renewable energy source" which is "a high quality fuel" that can be used in a "clean and modern energy plant" (the County Council have included a 250,000 tpa waste burning plant at Rivenhall in their PFI submission). These claims were made firmly in the context of tackling climate change.

The County Council has strenuously denied that the proposed process is waste incineration, knowing that this would be a massive U-turn. Lord Hanningfield raised the political stakes when at the 2001 elections he stated that those opposed to waste incineration should vote Tory, those in favour should vote Labour.

The Government's guidelines on waste derived fuels, obtained by Essex Green Party from defra on request, state that:

"It is important to recognise that SRF (solid recovered fuel - the type proposed by Essex county council) or refuse derived fuel (RDF) are derived from waste and its disposal is regulated as a waste. SRF/RDF must be combusted in a Waste Incineration Directive compliant plant ... to be utilized for energy recovery in incineration or coincineration plants."

The guidelines also make it crystal clear that only the biomass fraction of SRF can be classed as a renewable fuel. The guidance states that:

"in line with the Government's aspirations (for high levels of recycling and composting) .... would reduce the biomass energy content to around 35%."

The guidance also states that due to the variations in waste inputs (which can be seasonal, reliant on the amount of commercial or industrial waste and many other factors)

"the composition of SRF is not homogenous".

Cllr. James Abbott, Co-ordinator of Essex Green Party said:

"The Government guidance that defra have provided contradicts the claims by Essex County Council that their waste proposals do not amount to incineration. The Tories proposal to burn SRF is clearly defined in law as an incineration process, a fact they have desperately tried to go around as it is politically embarrasing for them.

The guidance also makes it clear that SRF cannot be considered in the simplistic way Essex County Council have projected it as a clean, renewable and reliable fuel source. SRF is not a standard material and depends very much on what the waste inputs are. The County Council have given the strong impression that SRF - ALL of the SRF - is a renewable fuel that will help curb climate change emissions. Yet the guidance clearly states that with high levels of recycling and composting - which Essex is moving towards, only around a third of the SRF can be classed as a renewable source.

SRF will contain ever higher levels of plastics and other fossil fuel derived materials as recycling and composting rates rise. Burning such material will release climate changing carbon dioxide and oxides of nitrogen directly into the atmosphere. Burning plastics also releases a complex range of chemicals into the air, which cannot be entirely removed by filters. Waste derived fuels can, and often are, co-fired with other materials which the County Council has conveniently omitted to mention - other than in the small print in its PFI documents. These materials could include sewage sludge and liquid wastes.

Instead of being straight with people, the County Council has tried to divert attention from its U-turn on burning waste. Making false green claims is all the rage these days as companies fall over themselves to try and paint their products with a green veneer. But Essex County Council is a public body, whose councillors are elected by Essex residents and whose services are funded by taxpayers. The council should surely work to much higher standards. The claims being made by the council and the article in essex matters are well short of those high standards. The County Council should correct this and start talking facts, not misleading spin."