BACKGROUND

An Energy Recovery Facility burns rubbish that is unsuitable for recycling in order to release heat energy. This heat energycan be used to generate electricity. Burning rubbish reduces the amount of waste going into landfill but can have detrimental effects on the local environment around the plant.In November 2007, Veolia Environmental Services submitted a planning application for an Energy Recovery Facility (waste incinerator) on land at the former Rufford Colliery, Rainworth (Nottinghamshire). The Energy Recovery Facility wouldbe able to process 180,000 tonnes of household and commercial wasteper year and would generate electricity whichwouldbe fed back into the national grid. In January 2009 the Council’s Planning Committee decided in favour of the planning application. However, in March 2009 it was decided that the planning application should be considered at a public inquiry after it became apparent that there was a lot of people that were against the development.

THE DEBATE

Argument for the Rufford Energy Recovery Facility– The residents of Nottinghamshire currently produce around 460,000tonnes of municipal solid waste each year. This includes: waste from households; waste produced by trade premises; and waste from litter and street sweeping. Nottinghamshire’s Waste Management Strategy aims to minimise the volume of waste sent to landfills, whilst recycling and recovering as much of the waste resource as possible. The proposed Rufford Energy Recovery Facility will deal with 180,000 tonnes of municipal residual waste (i.e., the waste remaining after recyclable materials have been removed) each year. The waste will be incinerated and the heat used to power a steam-driven turbine creating approximately 15MW of electrical power. This would be equivalent to providing power to 15000 homes. It would also provide jobs in the local area.

Argument against the Rufford Energy Recovery Facility - Wildlife conservation bodies (such as the Wildlife Trusts) are concerned about the potential impacts of the development upon the ecology of nearby heathland. The Wildlife Trust has objected to the development proposals on several grounds, includingthe fact that Rufford Energy Recovery Facility will produce emissions of nitrous oxides (NOx) which heathland is very sensitive toand pre-existing planning conditions required the site to be restored to heathland potentially allowing a robust complex of heathland habitat to be created.

YOUR TASK

  1. Research the advantages and disadvantages of waste incineration, making sure you consider: the potential climate change impacts;the energy that could be generated by waste incineration; and the growing amount of waste being sent to landfill.
  2. Research the potential impacts of the emissions created by waste incineration on heathland (particularly emissions of nitrous oxides (NOx)), and assess the potential benefits of converting the site to heathland (rather than using it for the construction of the incinerator).
  3. Using the information obtained in questions 1 and 2 decide whether you think planning permissions should be granted to the Rufford Energy Recovery Facility. Clearly justify your decision.