Chris Andrews (Dublin South East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the Adjournment and I welcome the presence of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Since it was first proposed, both the Minister and I have vigorously opposed the proposal to locate an incinerator at Poolbeg in Dublin. One does not need to be an engineer to see that it does not make any sense to put an incinerator in what is effectively a large cul-de-sac.

The proposed Poolbeg incinerator, which will be Dublin's first municipal waste incinerator and one of the largest such facilities in Europe, was granted planning permission by An Bord Pleanála in November 2007. In December of last year, the proposed facility was granted a licence by the EPA. The concerns of the local community about this facility are well known, with over 3000 objections registered with An Bord Pleanála.

This week, the Irish Waste Management Association, IWMA, which represents almost 95% of private waste management collections in Ireland, released the findings of an independent report commissioned to examine the need for the proposed waste incinerator at Poolbeg. The results of this report make worrying reading and reinforce the Minister's own point that this facility could end up costing the taxpayer up to €18 million per year over the next 20 years. We must ask ourselves what we are thinking of in allowing the local authority to impose this extra tariff on the taxpayers of this country.

The proposed plant has capacity to treat almost 600,000 tonnes of waste. Under the current contract, which was negotiated by Dublin City Council, the State is required to supply 320,000 tonnes of waste annually to the plant. If this is not reached, the State will be charged almost €90 for every tonne not supplied. The council has said it is taking the long view, but by the time this incinerator reaches its capacity of 600,000 tonnes it is likely, given the considerable progress in research, that new technology will be in place.

The cost to the State of not supplying waste is a deterrent to recycling and composting. Its is also potentially anti-competitive to allow one operator to have such control over the market, and it could prove very costly to the taxpayer if these targets are not met. Having to transport waste from the rest of the country to fill the incinerator would, in environmental terms, be robbing Peter to pay Paul, and would negatively offset any proposed benefits.

I have made my opposition to the incinerator well known, and this report further compounds my concerns. I do not believe Poolbeg is the correct location for a facility of this size and scale. The increased traffic flow into the region will cause further congestion in an area that is already at saturation point. It is similar to a car park in the mornings and evenings. Dublin Bay itself is an area of high conservation importance and is legally protected under both the EU habitats directive and the EU birds directive. Specific sites of conservation importance include the Liffey and Tolka Estuaries and Sandymount Strand, all immediately adjacent to the proposed development. The incinerator is bound to have a negative impact on these amenities.

The Minister is committed to reviewing the capacity of the incinerator. If the capacity is found to be incorrect, I urge the Minister to make the appropriate changes and reconsider the future of the plant.

John Gormley (Dublin South East, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Andrews for raising this issue.

As the Deputy is aware, waste management infrastructure projects are advanced by private sector service providers or by local authorities, generally by way of a public private partnership. It is a matter for the promoters of such projects to seek and obtain the necessary regulatory approvals - that is, planning permission and a waste licence. In carrying out their functions, the planning authorities, including An Bord Pleanála and the EPA, which deals with waste licensing, act independently of the Minister. The approved capacity of individual facilities is a matter for determination through these processes, as provided for in the Planning and Development and Waste Management Acts.

Since taking office I have continually stressed the twin environmental priorities of dealing with climate change issues and ensuring we take the necessary steps in managing our waste. We must explore the full range of technical solutions as well as modifying our behaviour in support of sustainable waste management. Undue emphasis on incineration as the cornerstone of waste management policy is detrimental to the development of alternative solutions. While incineration may well have a role in our future waste management strategy, I do not believe it will be on anything like the scale that was previously envisaged.

As a first step in my approach to modernising and reorienting the waste management sector, I arranged for an international consortium of consultants to undertake a comprehensive study on the waste sector, covering a wide range of issues which will help identify how best to proceed with further efforts to reduce waste levels, improve recycling rates and deliver equitable and cost-effective waste management solutions. Earlier today I published the consultants' report. This will be the launching pad for putting in place the policies that we now need to mark a new departure in our approach to waste management. I will bring proposals to Government which will ensure the proper ordering of the waste collection and wider waste management market. This in turn will provide the context in which many of the other recommendations contained in the report can be addressed. I wish to provide certainty for those in the waste management sector and a framework within which the necessary legislative changes can be brought forward.

With regard to the capacity of the proposed incinerator, it is my understanding that the quantities of residual waste currently being collected by the Dublin local authorities would not be sufficient to meet the put-or-pay requirement referred to by the Deputy. We have recently seen further increases in recycling rates in Dublin, with a corresponding drop in residual waste volumes. It is important to note that the recommendations of the report published today, which I intend to implement, will have the effect of further reducing the volumes of residual waste generated and driving more waste towards recycling. I am therefore concerned that the proposed incinerator will prove to be seriously oversized, and indeed that a liability for the ratepayer and taxpayer may ultimately arise. In these circumstances I have decided that the most appropriate course of action is to appoint an authorized person under section 224 of the Local Government Acts to conduct a full review of this project. It remains open to Dublin City Council to engage with my Department to discuss how the project might be brought into line with the emerging reality of the waste market and waste policy generally.