In this issue:
It’s a long time since we published our last Newsletter. Pressure of work, family life, and a disk crash on our computer (ugh!) have all contributed to this. However, we hope that it’s been worth the wait.
Paul Wagdin writes about our proposed Garden Open Day for Summer 2004. We hope that as many people as possible will support this very worthwhile project, which should raise a great deal of money for local charities.
In our main article, we take a look at Waste Disposal – not the most glamorous of topics, but one that is nevertheless very important. We all generate mountains of the stuff, but prefer not to think about what happens after the dustmen have been to collect it.
Finally, we review progress so far on the Village Appraisal. This project is one that the Village Society has long been calling for, and we hope that all villagers will participate in it.
The incentive for starting the Village Society was the threat of large-scale development outside the village boundary. However, over the years the society has developed to be much more than just a protest group. It has acted as a direct voice from a large proportion of villagers in support of our Parish Council on many issues, to maintain and improve the environment we are fortunate enough to enjoy.
We now have a proposal before the Management Committee that the Village Society should organise a Garden Open Day in aid of local good causes, such as the Village Hall, the Community Centre and St. Peter & St. James Hospice. It is too late to organise it for this year, but not too soon to be thinking of a Sunday in June or July 2004.
Briefly, what is involved is that on the chosen day, as many of the villagers as possible will open their garden to the public. People will be able to buy a ticket that allows them to gain entry to all the gardens that are open. It is hoped that other clubs and societies in the village will support the event by arranging teas, coffees, plant stalls, cake stalls, etc. in selected gardens. All proceeds will go to an agreed list of good causes.
This could be a day that will benefit everyone living in our delightful village of Newick. With good promotion, “outsiders” could also enjoy, for one day, what we relish for the rest of the year!
Before your Management Committee can make a decision on the Garden Open Day proposal, we will need to have an idea of how many villagers who enjoy their gardens, are prepared to share this pleasure, for just one day, with others. With enough support, we can start now to plan for something which can not only bring happiness to many people, but earn much needed finance for some local causes.
If in principle you are prepared to support this idea, please contact me on 723930.
Paul Wagdin
It’s time for me to say goodbye as Chairman. I will be stepping down at the AGM in July this year, after having served in this position for 2½ years. It’s been an interesting and challenging job, but I feel that now is the time for someone else to take over the reins. I wish my successor, and the Village Society as a whole, the very best for the future.
Andy Wilson
'Out of sight, out of mind' is the way most of us tend to regard household rubbish. After all, who wants to think about the yoghourt carton once the contents have been eaten?
However, the rising tide of waste which is threatening to engulf us is now becoming a matter of concern not only to local councils and environmental campaigners but also to the man in the street. We are faced with some uncomfortable choices about waste management and there is a very real danger that local authorities will opt for risky solutions to the waste problem because of the pressures imposed by the sheer volume of waste being created.
The County Council tells us that each person in East Sussex generates seven times their body weight in household waste each year. Add to that household waste from Brighton & Hove together with waste generated by visitors and businesses throughout the area and the volume of waste to be disposed of rises to 1.5 million tonnes each year – enough to fill St Paul's Cathedral five times over.
At present landfill, the traditional rubbish tip, is the major method of dealing with untreated waste. But we are running out of holes in the ground into which rubbish can be tipped, and the alternative, land raise, piling up waste above ground level, is even more unacceptable. And by 2005 our existing waste sites will all be full.
The alternatives to landfill are waste reduction, re-use, recycling, composting and incineration. Waste reduction – eliminating and reducing waste at source – is the preferred method of waste management but relies heavily on the co-operation of commerce and industry to minimise the use and wastage of materials. The consumer is seen as having a vital role in minimising waste, but anyone who has complained to a supermarket about unnecessary packaging will take that with a grain of salt.
Recycling, the collection of materials such as glass, paper, plastics and cans, for reprocessing to produce a useable material or product, is the waste management option which seems most likely to achieve public support. Many people already dispose of bottles and newspapers at collection points in their locality but the range of materials collected and a higher level of public participation must both be increased . Methods of collection vary, but new approaches are being adopted to improve the proportion of waste which is recycled.
In the context of household waste, recycling goes hand-in-hand with composting, the decomposition of organic matter such as garden waste, waste food and other biodegradable materials. This can either be undertaken at home in composting bins or centrally with the material to be composted being taken to a household waste site or collected through a kerbside collection scheme. To encourage home composting Lewes District Council is offering low-price bins, while Wealden District Council has handed out 6,000 free bins to ratepayers.
Despite such measures, Britain is lagging behind Europe in waste management. Recycling is a matter of course in countries such as Germany, Switzerland, Denmark and the Netherlands, with the result that about 50 per cent of waste is being recycled. Britain, where over 80 per cent of household and municipal rubbish continues to go into landfill, currently recycles only 9 per cent of its waste. This is totally unacceptable and a series of European Union directives is putting pressure on local authorities to improve their waste management practices.
In 2001, East Sussex recycled about 10 per cent of household waste, with plans to double this by the end of 2003 and to achieve a target of 33 per cent by 2011. However, performance across the county is variable; in Wealden District for example, a recycling rate of only 4 per cent has in two years been increased to 50 per cent in areas where a kerbside recycling scheme which provides for the separate collection of green waste is in operation. Overall, a recycling rate of just under 20 per cent is being achieved.
Newick's Recycling Facilities – Is this really the best we can do?
Lewes District has been slower off the mark. Although facilities are provided for local collection of bottles, newspaper and plastic, this is a voluntary option as far as residents are concerned. However, kerbside recycling which places a greater onus on the householder to participate has been introduced throughout most of Lewes, and schemes covering Ringmer and Kingston are due to be launched within the next two months. Even so, achieving a target of recycling 30 per cent of waste by 2005 must be questionable.
Unfortunately, time is running out for traditional waste management methods. The Beddingham landfill site between Lewes and Newhaven which accepts household waste from Lewes District, the northern half of Wealden District and about 75 per cent of household waste from Brighton & Hove will, at current rates of waste disposal, be full up by 2005. A similar timescale applies to the use of East Sussex's other main site at Pebsham between Bexhill and Hastings.
These constraints make it all the more likely that local authorities will be obliged to rely on incineration, now referred to as Energy from Waste (EfW), as the solution to the waste problem. It might quite reasonably be assumed that burning waste is a good way of disposing of it particularly if the energy thus released can be recovered within the plant and used for community heating and to generate electricity to be fed into the grid- providing a potential revenue source for the plant operator.
However, the reality is neither as simple nor as innocuous as it might first appear. Although incinerators may vary in size and capacity, the benefits associated with the recovery of energy are most effectively achieved in large plants the size of factories which demand a constant supply of waste so that they can operate around the clock 365 days a year. And, because of their high capital cost such plants are commissioned on the assumption that they will operate for around 20 years.
Throughout that period the incinerator will have to be fed with waste while residues in the form of ‘bottom ash' and ‘fly ash’ will have to be removed. Where access to the plant is by road rather than rail or water the volume of heavy traffic carrying waste and residues will be considerable. This flies in the face of the sustainability principle which underpins current planning.
Something else that will go by the board if large incinerators are built is the proximity principle which advocates that ‘all waste should be disposed of as close as practicable to the point at which it is generated’. The appetite of such incinerators for waste is such that the catchment areas will be extensive (Much of East Sussex's waste and all Brighton & Hove’s waste could end up in Newhaven, for example) and it has even been suggested that overseas waste could be shipped to our shores: Newhaven again!
Although opposition to incinerators on purely environmental grounds has been widely voiced, it is the possible health risk associated with incinerators which has proved to be the greatest source of concern. Worries revolve around the emission of dioxins into the atmosphere and the toxic nature of the fly-ash which accumulates in the filters designed to remove dangerous chemicals from emissions. Such ash is likely to be disposed of in landfill sites, further poisoning the environment.
Of course, the government and the EU have introduced regulations and guidelines with regard to the operation of incinerators and the emission of residues. But rules and regulations are not always observed. Last year an article in The Times revealed that the 11 incinerators currently operating in England had been responsible for 546 breaches of statutory emission levels in 1999 and 2000.
So, while urgent attention must be devoted to the waste problem there are serious doubts about incineration as a safe solution. The Waste Local Plan for East Sussex and Brighton & Hove was published in draft form in November 2000. Among the many recommendations it makes for waste management is the siting of two incinerators within the county.
Given that landfill will, at current estimates, no longer be an option after 2005, there is great pressure on local authorities to approve Energy from Waste (incineration). Indeed, East Sussex County Council has, in the last few weeks, agreed to conclude negotiations with Onyx Aurora, a waste management company, to handle waste disposal for East Sussex and Brighton & Hove. The contractor has stated its interest in constructing two EfW incinerators, one at Newhaven and the other at Pebsham.
It is estimated that the earliest time for the Newhaven incinerator to come on stream would be October 2009. Meanwhile, a Public Inquiry into the Waste Local Plan is due to start on 13th May in Lewes, at which time most aspects of the plan will come under scrutiny. For its part, Newick Village Society has objected to the proposals for the construction of incinerators contained in the plan (see below).
Our Objections to the Waste Local PlanDespite the precautionary measures outlined in the Waste Local Plan we are concerned that Energy from Waste Plants, once built and operational, are not amenable to control by local government due to their high capital cost, the extended period over which they must remain in operation to recoup that cost, and to the fact that their operation will be subject to the commercial needs of the private companies which will run them. We also note that although the UK ‘Management Plan for Exports and Imports 1988’ prohibits most waste imports for disposal, that policy is currently being revised, and there is a local perception that, were domestic sources of waste to prove inadequate to keep an EfW plant running continuously 24-hours a day for periods of up to 20 years, waste could be imported from Europe - an option to which the Newhaven site, in particular, would be at risk. In a number of respects EfW raises problems of control and environmental protection which, though not as serious as those relating to the generation of electricity by nuclear power are, in some ways, not dissimilar. Now is the time to avoid such problems! For all these reasons we question whether EfW Is an appropriate and, over a 20-year period, sustainable solution to the problem of waste. We object, therefore to the proposed EfW (incinerator) sites at Newhaven and Mountfield. |
You may already be aware that Newick Parish Council is undertaking a Village Appraisal. This will lead to the adoption of a Village Plan, which will be taken into consideration when decisions affecting Newick are made.
An initial consultation exercise has already taken place, in which maps of the village were posted at a number of locations, and villagers were given the opportunity to write down their own comments. As you might expect, some interesting views were expressed! In some areas there was a broad consensus, but others seem to be more controversial, with strong views expressed on both sides.
The next stage is the preparation of the Appraisal Questionnaire, which will be distributed to all households in the village during May. The Parish Council’s steering group has appointed a number of sub-committees to formulate the questionnaire, covering the following areas:
Housing and Planning
Employment and Education
Sports, Leisure and Environment
Services, Local Government and Transport
Newick Village Society is represented on the Housing and Planning group. So far, the sub-committees have prepared initial drafts of their part of the questionnaire, and a draft of the whole questionnaire is currently being prepared.
The Village Appraisal is everyone’s chance to say what they think is good about living in Newick, or what is not so good. All ages will be consulted, and most parts of the questionnaire allow each member of the family to give their own answers. The opinions of teenagers are just as valuable as the elderly, and doubtless will in many cases be different!