Buttington Quarry - ERF

Received 11 May 2021
From Tom Forrester

Representation

Dear Sir / Madam

I write to object in the strongest possible terms to the proposed incinerator at Buttington. As someone [***REDACT***] with a strong background in Planning and Sustainability I feel I can provide useful informative comments about the planning application and how from every perspective it is a really bad idea. Let's look at each angle:

Council lease.
Wolverhampton City Council have struggled to improve their recycling rates over the last 10 years. They have a 25 year contract with Veolia that makes them obliged to send waste for incineration. If they don't meet the tonnage agreement they are obliged to compensate the company. The result is that recyclable waste such as cardboard is often DIVERTED from recycling and burnt instead to meet the targets. Unfortunately because of the 25 year lease they're now locked into this agreement so residents' waste is being burnt rather than recycled.

National Economy and Tourism

If the Buttington burner goes ahead an extra 100 HGV vehicles will be on the road. This is the main tourist route from England to the Welsh west coast including attractions such as Barmouth. It is a long windy road with little chance for overtaking. When tourists realise that their frequent trips to Barmouth may involve getting stuck behind slow moving HGVs they are very likely to decide to visit other seaside towns avoiding the A483. Has a feasibility study been done to establish the economic effect of all these extra lorries and how it will effect not just Barmouth but all the towns and villages along this route if people stop using this road?

Local Economy and Character
Buttington, Trewern and Middletown are already affected by the noise of the quarry and the road. To approve this application will show a complete disdain for the local residents, affect house prices in a negative way, increase noise, pollution and overall quality of life for local residents. Please note I'm not a local resident so my views are more impartial but I can see the detrimental impact this will cause.

Transport and Pollution
In Caerphilly some houses were knocked down because the pollution levels were deemed too harmful for residents. This was decided by the Welsh government. How is it then acceptable or appropriate for you to consider approving this application to allow an additional 100 HGVs to go up and down the road? Remember this will be operational from 7am to 7pm on weekdays and 9am to 5pm on Saturdays. So the noise and air pollution will be constant for these poor residents and other local villages and towns along the HGV route for six days a week.

CO2 targets
Labour and Plaid Cymru often criticise the Conservatives for their [***REDACT***] environmental policies [***REDACT***]. It is palpably clear that incineration is not the answer to our waste or our energy problems. We need better energy efficiency targets, smarter homes and buildings, and greater investment in renewable energy such as wind, wave, solar and geothermal. Combine that with better recycling, biodigesters and a REDUCTION in waste such as food and packaging in the first place and suddenly we have a roadmap for a more sustainable Wales for future generations.

If you approve this application you will lock the next Welsh generation into a burner that'll mean more waste, more CO2, more traffic for another 25 years. Once you make that decision that's it.

On every level, EVERY level, this is a bad idea. The only people this will benefit is big business. I fail to see how anyone can possibly see this as a good idea for once all these factors are taken into account. The creation of around 30 jobs does not justify all the negative consequences of this proposal. Incineration certainly hasn't helped Wolverhampton and it certainly won't help Wales.

Regards,
Tom