Are the LibDems lying to us about the Incinerator?
The Beddington Incinerator and the Liberal Democrat run Sutton Council have come under fire recently concerning irregularities around the Beddington waste “recycling” plant.
The Incinerator, or Energy Recovery Facility (ERF), commenced formally in Sutton in 2015 after satisfying planning obligations that required a proposal to identify and include renewable technologies to achieve a 20% reduction in CO2 emissions.
This special measure was the flagship of the Liberal Democrat manifesto at the time, a cutting-edge District Heating company set to be wholly owned by Sutton Council and originally touted within the Council to combat “Fuel Poverty and Energy Insecurity” which it highlighted as two of the most serious issues facing local residents.
More carbon-intensive than landfill
The ERF was promoted as a green alternative, superseding landfill and providing renewable energy to the entirety of Sutton. Viridor itself states that the facility provides the South London Waste Partnership and businesses with a safe and cost-effective alternative to landfill. The project was upheld by the Liberal Democrat Council as a win for the borough, with all the waste from surrounding boroughs being shipped here for incineration, thus reducing landfill whilst providing green energy and dealing with waste in a sustainable manner.
However, recent information in the Greenhouse Gas and Air Quality Impacts of Incineration and Landfill report shows that by 2035, incineration will become more carbon-intensive than landfill - this will remain within the contract term of the Beddington Incinerator.
Lucrative business opportunity
Further, the report outlines how Incinerators currently derive a two-fold business benefit in that, unlike other waste processing facilities, there is no tax on the fuel (waste) or on emissions, providing a lucrative business opportunity and incentive. The Beddington Incinerator contract is thought to be worth c.£1billion with Sutton Council receiving millions per annum in business rates. Sadly, the reform to the Farmlands where the incinerator is situated have fallen behind and the more expensive requirements have not been actioned with the Council not yet taking action.
Misleading statistics on CO2 emissions and recycling
Dispatches, which recently aired on Channel 4, continued to outline how areas that invested in incinerators correlated with areas that struggle to recycle, highlighting a disincentive to invest in appropriate recycling. Troublingly, the same documentary details how Incinerators only have to report CO2 emissions from non-fossil fuel waste, meaning that all plastics are omitted from the statistics, which can immediately halve their published output. Finally, it revealed that the way in which Councils report on recycling levels is based on how much is collected, and not how much is actually recycled. This revelation has now prompted the Independent group in Beddington to submit FOI’s on the matter to see if their residents have been misled by the Liberal Democrat group.
More polluting than coal
Incineration as an industry compares itself to electricity generation from coal as a comparison to derive its “green credentials”. However, in the majority of cases, Incineration is only slightly better than direct coal burning in terms of pollution. In the case of the Beddington Incinerator, reports show that the plant is up to 3 times more polluting than other facilities. The Environment Agency says that Viridor self-reported 236,396 tonnes of CO2 in only six months from July to December 2019. A comparable site in Runcorn produced two-thirds less CO2 on a like for like basis. This level of CO2 output is equivalent to over 200,000 family cars, twice the number of vehicles in Sutton. In terms of CO2 intensity, coal produces 870 grams of CO2 per unit of electricity produced. The Beddington Incinerator however produces 1,302 grams per unit. Particulate Matter, as output by the Incinerator, has been associated with a significantly higher death rate among children up to one year old when they live under smoke from an incinerator chimney. The Beddington Incinerator has had 29 emission breaches, including particulate matter, which Councillor Abellan minimised by saying that these numerous breaches were brief.
Repeat warnings and serious incidents
Alongside the 29 emission breaches, the Beddington incinerator has also suffered a serious fire which was minimised at the time despite images to the contrary and later a report. Recent FOI’s to the Environment Agency reveal a truly troubling 20 warnings in 18 months. With over one warning a month and more than two breaches a month alongside a serious fire, the scrutiny has been exceedingly low from local LibDem councillors and the Liberal Democrat controlled council.
More recently, three labour councillors stated they were “shocked and appalled” by plans to link new housing along the Purley way to energy supplied by the polluting incinerator. A claim made about linking burning waste for heat to environmentally friendly solutions was slapped down by the Labour councillors as “patently untrue” and they have requested this is removed from the document to ensure there is credibility with residents.
3 Councillors rake in nearly £250,000
Despite this, the Environment Agency recently approved an increase of 50,000 tonnes of waste burning with no credible opposition from the Liberal Democrat run Council. Chair of the Environment Committee, Manuel Abellan, is on record stating that the emissions output of the Incinerator is “just steam”. His vice-chair, Liberal Democrat Ben Andrew, was also unable to attend the committee meeting to discuss the recent increase to burning, instead, sending a deputised Liberal Democrat Ward Councillor, Hanna Zuchowska, who happens to be the partner of Manuel Abellan and who does not live near to the Incinerator or in the ward she represents. Together these three will be paid just under a quarter of a million pounds during their four-year term for their part-time roles, with Cllr Andrew being available one day per week and both Cllr Andrew and Cllr Zuchowska refusing to sign complaints with New Mill Quarter Residents about SDEN for years.
Residents repeatedly left with no heating after paying through the nose for energy
Sutton Decentralised Energy Network Ltd (SDEN), the Liberal Democrat project used to permit the planning obligations of the Incinerator, is also now under scrutiny. After borrowings of millions in taxpayer money to get the project up and running and to satisfy the planning obligations of the Incinerator, the residents of New Mill Quarter have, to date endured 18 site wide heating and hot water outages, 2 emergency services visits, and claim that sky high pricing is affecting them - as the project went live with a rate of 6.1p per kWh compared to the freely market available pricing of 3p per kWh, excluding the standing charge of several hundred pounds per annum.
Recent Council meetings have addressed the fact that Sutton Council may have used the logos and branding of the Heat Trust, a body they are not linked to or affiliated with in any way and used their work product to justify pricing in a way that the Heat Trust encourages people to report as misuse on their website. The initial claims about the success of the project used to access millions of funding are now also coming under scrutiny with a recent update to the financials showing that operating profits will now halve, falling well under the level required to access lending and in turn get approval for the Incinerator. The Internal Rate of Return which was exactly hit to access millions in lending has also now dropped to a level which would not have given the project or the Incinerator the go ahead.
Planning irregularities and broken promises
Further irregularities also seem to be present with the planning around SDEN. Residents are asking if the council allowed Barratt to backtrack on commitments to the community in return for backing the heating network. “Suddenly Barratts gets 80 new properties and the retail space is halved, the bus interchange that was promised to the local area is removed and the heating network is adopted” says Sheldon Vestey, Chair of the New Mill Quarter Residents Association when he spoke to Source Material to be featured in the Telegraph. “Now I can’t say what happened there, but it all happens around the same time”. Liberal Democrat Councillor Hanna Zuchowska who was present at the time also allowed the “minor amendments” to pass unopposed despite residents’ objections at the time which also removed the widely promised farmers markets from the community.
Were Sutton Lib Dems telling the truth?
With a faulty heat network and increasing publication of issues surrounding Incineration, it is now looking more and more likely that Sutton Liberal Democrats may not have been truthful with residents over the reality of the “green credentials” of incineration, the fuel poverty-fighting aspect of their district heating network, price parity or the money they would generate with millions in government lending. All of which they used to push through planning for the Incinerator and to sell hundreds of millions in property. Recent revelations shared by the national press reveal an overcharge of up to 30% which HEB committee leader, Liberal Democrat Jayne McCoy denies. Neither SDEN nor the Council, however, has taken any legal action against these claims which if untrue as they claim could be linked to why the Liberal Democrat project has failed to secure any of the extra customers it set out to.
Widespread local opposition
Local resident Dave Tchilingarian said “Councillors responsible for waste management and representing locations overshadowed by the incinerator claimed to know nothing about Viridor's permit being granted to burn even more in Sutton. It was left to residents to expose that. Claims of incineration being the least worst option for our health and environment is plain wrong"
Environmentalist and member of UKWIN, Jim Duffy said “The carbon dioxide emissions from the incinerator in a year would equal those from 200,000 family cars, while Sutton has about 100,000 cars. So Viridor can't claim this is a green method of dealing with waste. We need a Zero Waste Plan like the EU, Scotland and Wales and move away from incineration.”
The Green Parties Sutton Co-ordinator Mark Webb said “we cannot allow the Incinerator contract to continue until 2045. There needs to be a plan to shut down the Incinerator as soon as possible in line with declaring a climate emergency and the commitment to zero carbon emissions by 2030.”
Peter Alfrey, resident said “If Sutton Council and the others in the South London Waste Partnership take their commitments to our health and our environment seriously, then they have got to start reducing waste going to the incinerator and ideally close it down completely by 2030.
That means that they must start acting now to reduce waste and increase recycling. They also need to work with residents of New Mill Quarter to explore genuinely renewable sources of heating and hot water to replace the faulty, filthy incinerator supply”
The Labour party said “Labour have opposed the Beddington incinerator from the start on environmental grounds. Our local residents don't deserve the resulting worsening air pollution and increased heavy traffic, we should be concentrating on increased recycling and cutting down on waste. However, the reality of the incinerator has been even worse than we predicted, not only for the environment but also for the pockets of local residents. We are most concerned by the suggestions of impropriety on the part of Lib Dem councillors and will be investigating further.”