Opposition group 'has a mandate' from 7,000 locals

The group opposing the College Proteins incineration plant in Nobber acts on behalf of over 7,000 people opposed to the proposal. The chairman of North-East Against Incineration (NEAI), Christy O'Reilly, told last week's Bord Pleanala oral hearing in Carrickmacross: "The local communities of the area include the parish communities of Nobber, Castletown, Kilneg, Lobinstown, Drumconrath, Meath Hill, Kilmainhamwood, Kingscourt and surrounding parishes. With the exception of Kingscourt, they are largely rural communities with small villages which provide local services," said Mr O'Reilly. He sauid the group favoured development that serves a local or regional need. "However, any such proposed development must not and cannot impact in any negative way on the quality of life of the local and regional community, on the local and regional environment nor on the local and regional landscape." He said when the planning application for the incinerator became a reality, the NEAI committee was established following a public meeting. The committee is a cross-representation of the regional community from a wide range of professions. "The committee received a mandate to act on behalf of over 7,000 people in the region - a mandate to oppose the proposed incinerator on the grounds that there is no need for it, our fears for the future based on undisputable medical research of authentic medical organisations rather than industry researchers with a vested interest and on the past and present performance of College Proteins." "With that mandate, we raised over €140,000 in order to conduct our case in 2008 in a professional and efficient manner and in accordance with the requirements of the board and its inspector. We fully embraced and participated in the process. There is no need for me to outline the manner in which the last application ended, other than to say it was particularly devastating for us in that we, as a community have had to embark on the same process all over again, through no fault of our own, at our own expense while at the same time providing for our families and meeting the extremely difficult challenges of everyday living." The first speakers from the Nobber community to address the oral hearing on Wednesday included Larry McEntee, George Williams, Mary Reilly, Dermot and Rose Goodwin and Teresa Cassidy. They expressed dissatisfaction with the company's current operation and said there is never any resolving of any complaints made to the company on issues of odours resulting from the operation of the plant, the smell from lorries transporting material to the factory, noise from traffic to and from the plant. It was stated by a number of speakers that outdoor activities at homes of people affected have been upset as a result of the odours. Speakers stated that, on many occasions, they have got assurances from John Gilroy, CEO of College Proteins, that problems would be resolved but that they never are. The view was expressed that the proposed development would result in a reluctance of people to decide to live in the area and that, as a result, the population would be affected and community spirit and participation in community life in sports and community activity would suffer. Speakers stated that, as a result of dissatisfaction with problems they have experienced with the current rendering plant, they believe the company would not run the proposed development properly. Jim McMahon, a private consultant specialising in utilities and a mechanical engineer with 26 years' experience in the power generation industry, claimed the proposal is not a real combined heat and power plant. He said the company was hiding behind the CHP name and added that he was "genuinely surprised that College Proteins have persisted with the indefensible CHP alias". He said one of the reasons that the proposal should not be considered a combined heat and power plant is fuel will not be readily available and in continuous supply. He said"meat and bonemeal has an uncertain long-term future and liquids have no certain origin. He said it won't improve overall efficiency and won't give primary energy savings. He added that "52,000 tonnes more water will condense in the sky over Nobber each year, which will have the effect of increasing plume visibility". Regarding particulate emmsions, Mr McMahon said there was "no mention of filter efficiency" in the EIS of the company's application and that there was "no intention to shut down if a filter bursts". He said that "even 99.9% efficiency" would mean that over nine tonnes of fine fly ash will emanate from the stack per annum. He also was concerned at the possibility of the project becoming a merchant incinerator. "College's record of advising the public and the EPA appears to be a one-way street. Even with the best of intentions, commercial pressures to become a merchant incinerator will arise," he claimed. Many objectors to the development are fearful that, even though the company says the proposal is specifically designed to burn meat and bonemeal, that, if approved, they may later on apply to burn municipal refuse waste. He said such a project is not "in safe hands". Shane O'Neill of OGE Hydrogeology Groundwater Engineering, on behalf of North-East Against Incineration, said: "The EIS and subsequent RFI and the presentations as they relate to water soils and geology are not adequate, insufficient and demonstrate that the receiving water environment is poorly understood." He said no attempt had yet been made to determine the risk to the local drainage system from flooding as a consquence of run-off from the proposed development site." Mr O'Neill added: "I would respectfully suggest to An Bord Pleanala, that until the basic hydrological and hydrogeological data is provided in full and the EIS completed properly, that the application should be refused as it poses too great a potential risk to the water environment."