Wapseys Wood site ex­pan­sion pro­posed

Re­cov­ery fa­cil­ity planned to help to meet needs when land­fill ceases

Buckinghamshire Advertiser - - NEWS -

Land­fill­ing will cease in De­cem­ber 2017 as the site in Ger­rards Cross will be­come full to ca­pac­ity, and to meet this Ve­o­lia En­vi­ron­men­tal Ser­vices want to build a Re­source Re­cov­ery Cen­tre (RRC) there.

In the sup­port­ing state­ment to Bucks County Coun­cil (BCC) Ve­o­lia state it will be ‘nec­es­sary to have al­ter­na­tive in­fra­struc­ture’ to man­age waste when land­fill­ing ceases.

The state­ment also points to­wards the emerg­ing Re­place­ment Min­er­als and Waste Plan for Buck­ing­hamshire, which iden­ti­fies the need to find sites to de­liver an ad­di­tional 386,000 tonnes of new waste re­cov­ery ca­pac­ity by 2026 for Bucks to meet land­fill di­ver­sion tar­gets.

The RRC will con­sist of a waste re­cov­ery fa­cil­ity (WRF) for waste re­cy­cling, trans­fer and refuse de­rived fuel (RDF) pro­duc­tion and will di­vert waste that is cur­rently go­ing to land­fill.

There also be anaer­o­bic di­ges­tion fa­cil­ity, with a ca­pac­ity of 50,000tpa.

Ex­ist­ing in­fra­struc­ture will be used and the pro­posed new build­ings will will be built in an area of the site that will no longer be land­filled.

The non tech­ni­cal sum­mary warns against a ‘no de­vel­op­ment op­tion’ on an en­vi­ron­men­tal ba­sis.

“Waste cur­rently dis­posed of the site would be di­verted else­where to other more dis­tant re­cov­ery or dis­posal fa­cil­i­ties,” it reads.

Im­pli­ca­tions of this would mean ‘waste that could be re­cy­cled or re­cov­ered could con­tinue to be sent to land­fill, which is con­trary to gov­ern­ment pol­icy and would re­sult in sig­nif­i­cant car­bon emis­sions’.

It also ar­gues that ‘re­gional as­pi­ra­tions’ on ‘strate­gic waste man­age­ment’ would not at be met, and job op­por­tu­ni­ties, of which they say there would be 48, would not be cre­ated.

The ap­pli­ca­tion was sub­mit­ted to BCC on May 17 and is cur­rently be­ing con­sid­ered by South Bucks Dis­trict Coun­cil.

The sum­mary adds in con­clu­sion: “It has been demon­strated that very spe­cial cir­cum­stances ex­ist with the iden­ti­fied need, the lack of suit­able al­ter­na­tive non-green belt sites, the char­ac­ter­is­tics of the site as a long es­tab­lished waste man­age­ment site and the wider ben­e­fits of sus­tain­able waste man­age­ment. Th­ese very spe­cial cir­cum­stances are con­sid­ered to out­weigh the po­ten­tial harm to the green belt.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.