CEMEX : PUBLIC NOT PERMITTED AT "SECRET" SITE VISIT TO VIEW UNAUTHORISED CONSTRUCTION OF EQUIPMENT FOR 100% WASTE BURNING!
Only WCC Regulatory Councillors are welcome to see CLIMAFUEL plant - see Peter Barnes; Brian Moss; Jose Compton; Michael Doody; Pat Henry; Nina Knapman; Joan Lea; Barry Longden; Sue Main; Ray Sweet; Ian Smith; to attend Cemex site at 11.00 on 25th March. We have pointed out that this Cemex REFUSAL to allow any of the public on the site visit, that is now to be held in "secret", is "not fair", is unethical, and flies in the face of the need for transparency, openness, community engagement, public participation and Cemex's own stated position as being open to visitors.
WCC CONSTITUTION SAYS:
"Applicants and objectors will accompany the Committee only in order to facilitate access, point out physical features and answer factual questions. A site visit may exceptionally be followed by a factual presentation on behalf of the applicant (see section 26). At least one representative of any objectors should be invited to observe the presentation."
But DIVIDE the community and RULE is how Cemex always play it! WHY COULD IT POSSIBLY BE - that the meeting MUST be HELD IN SECRET?
ENVIRONMENT AGENCY PERMIT OVER 100% WASTE! as they issue a permit variation to burn over 100% waste at Cemex co-incinerator. The public were told in the public consultation CARRIED OUT BY CEMEX IN THE SUMMER OF 2006 that the "Climafuel" was to be a substitute for 30% of the coal, and was to be "household waste - your black bag rubbish". But afterwards they find out the permit has allowed various industrial and commercial wastes to be incorporated, with a 50% increase in chlorine - to name but one "difference". The copy of the application and consultation document version 1 June 2006 as carried out by Cemex during 2006 is, of course, not on the Environment Agency's Public Register. They have a new different version of the original application in which the new industrial wastes from dechromatation, decyanidation and neutralisation have been included.
And the public were told the 15 tonnes an hour would represent 30% of the thermal value. But given that the substitute fuel only goes into the combustion chamber, and not into the kiln, surely the replacement is ONLY in the calciner? It is difficult (to say the least!) to find out the "true facts" about what is being burn there, but it appears about 60% of the coal is burnt in the calciner, being approximately 18 tonnes an hour. This has been substituted by 6 tph of tyres, which have a higher calorific value, but leaving that aside - there are about 12 tph coal to replace. These are being replaced by 15tph of "climafuel", which has a calorific value between 15 and 23 MJ/kg. So there you are - over 100% replacement. What impact this will have no one knows, except there have been some increases in polluting emissions at Barrington and South Ferriby imported Dutch "climafuel" has been trialled, which is apparently "of a better more consistent quality than the RDF available in the UK". There is a three year contract to import it through Grimsby, where the bales are broken as it is unloaded into "walking floor" trailers for despatch for co-incineration at the cement plants. So much for A LOCAL SOLUTION TO A LOCAL PROBLEM!
PLANNING PERMISSION FOR 100% WASTE - WHO NEEDS IT?
Not Cemex anyway, who have built the "climafuel" docking and transfer equipment without bothering to wait for the planning application to be heard by the WARWICKSHIRE County Council Regulatory committee on ALL FOOLS DAY, as was planned. Instead Councillors, in an apparent breach of Protocol, are to go on a "site visit" on 25th March before the application has been even discussed at Committee. See Minutes Regulatory Committee WCC 4th March 2008. In response to a WCC letter 8th February advising Cemex that these "work are completely unauthorised" and that Cemex may "face enforcement action to secure their removal" and to "cease work to allow the submitted planning application to be considered" Cemex have his to say on 26th February:
* we are surprised complainants have seen it as it is low to the ground.
* we can erect the conveyor system under "permitted development".
* it is a relatively small building, area 745 square metres.
* it is extremely unlikely that the officers will recommend councillors to refuse it.
* the cement plant had planning permission in 1996, therefore no policy objection.
* there is very little likelihood of the operation causing harm by noise, dust, fumes or odour.
* once it was considered it was not permitted development we had already started building.
* the Government sees retrospective permission as an appropriate way to regularise "unauthorised development".
RUGBY AREA COMMITTEE 24 JANUARY:
complained that this Committee had an apparent lack of a meaningful role, and the members of the County Councillors were not being consulted on MAJOR planning applications. WCC lawyers said that these MAJOR applications went straight to the Regulatory Committee "who had the necessary officer support and resources and comprehensive reports and training." The Committee resolved to write to the Strategic Director of Performance and Development requesting the Area Committee be consulted, in particular on applications for planning permission in respect of significant developments affecting the Area." The $100 question: Does the "unlawful" erection of equipment and "retrospective" planning application to burn 100% waste at the Rugby Cemex plant constitute "significant development?"
HAZARDOUS WASTE FLY TIPPING AT SOUTHAM?
LACK OF PPC PERMIT AND PLANNING PERMISSION OF NO CONCERN TO ANYONE as the Regulatory Committee of WCC 4th March got themselves into even more hot water! The officers advised them to renew a "further extension to an old, already expired several times, 'temporary' planning permission for non-hazardous waste CKD which had been granted temporarily in 2000 just until all the waste CKD could be dumped in CLOSED LANDFILL in Parkfield Road Rugby. The Cement Kiln Dust from a coal burning cement plant could be dumped at Southam. After we intervened and explained EU Law and hazardous waste they became even more "mixed up" and admitted they could not understand what is the difference between the previously expired permitted CKD from the coal burning process, and the HAZARDOUS WASTE BYPASS DUST from a co-incinerating cement plant. "The EA had been asked to clarify the issue" which "had lead to even more confusion." They said that "The unauthorised depositing was not a fundamental problem as the EA and Stratford Council did not appear to be overly concerned." GREAT! So no need to COMPLY WITH THE LAW, and no need to have the LEGALLY REQUIRED PPC PERMIT or any legally required planning permission? Bob Stevens asked "whether the applicants (Cemex) would continue depositing at the site" that has no planning permission, and Ian Grace said " this was likely, and that it would be difficult to take action against the company to make them halt in view of the uncertainty surrounding the issue." The initial 2004 PPC application is still the subject of an appeal before the Planning Inspector Kevin Gordon, and yet a further abeyance till mid 2008 has been granted. One reason why the PPC application had been REFUSED by the EA was BECAUSE the site has NO PLANNING PERMISSION. It has no PPC operating permission either, and by October 2007 this became a legal requirement.
MP JEREMY WRIGHT ; ROCK AND HARD PLACE!
The very unfortunate and "shady" re-organisation of the parliamentary boundaries has taken the "Kenilworth" out of Rugby, and placed it in with Southam instead. This leaves ex MP Andy King, Labour, (lost seat to Jeremy in 2005) to slug it out in Rugby with the Jeremy replacement - Mark Pawsey Conservative. Meanwhile , as Jeremy sails away into the sunset at Southam and Kenilworth, this has coincided with Cemex's submitting two EIA SCOPING ASSESSMENTS for MBT/IHT at Southam - or at Rugby - or at both? Jeremy appears to be between a rock and a hard place. If he supports Rugby residents in their rejection of this application he will not do very well in Southam.
SQUANDERING PUBLIC MONEY AND WASTING OUR TIME IN SECRET MEETINGS:
At Southam and Warwick and Rugby secret meetings have been going on between various WCC officers, and Councillors, and Cemex, and local parish representatives (NIMBYS) who are apparently only interested in themselves, and "their little area", and are unable to "think outside of their box", and who "ONLY worried about the increase in lorries in their villages". They also insist on "keeping all the groups separate" so that there will be no joined-up thinking and holistic approach, and so that the COMMUNITY/IES will be REMAIN DIVIDED and SEGREGATED! So many "secret meetings" going on all the time , a massive waste of public time and funds, where officers of the EA, RBC and WCC are concerned - no Agenda, no minutes, no public, no notice, venues are hidden etc. This is a neat little ACTION PLAN, and in this way you can "tell'em what you want and no one will know any different!"
LIST OF VARIOUS COMMITTEES AND MEMBERS TO BE COMPILED.
We are tabulating a list of all these committees and groups and will be publishing a full list of who is involved and how to contact them.
WATCH THIS SPACE!
