BBC Talkback 06 July 2008

[davroslesueur]

I personally thought Deputy Duhamel came over very well.

Biggest shock for me was actually agreeing with something Deputy Guy De Faye said!
His comment on the "National" Art Gallery not being funded by the tax payer was spot on.

What are your views on the discussion?

[Jeremy Strickland]

I'm not sure we need a completely new building to house a gallery. Even if it went ahead I agree - not at our expense.

And what odds that should it be funded from the public purse we would be charged an entrance fee?

What would we display in this 'national' edifice?

To attract both Islanders, and tourists alike we would need to display famous works of art. This would entail enormous cost for security, insurance, shipping, let alone maintenance of building and staff. Would it break even? Would it need a States subsidy?

[nickpalmer]

My point (near the end) about when Guy de Faye did a Jim Kirk to which I metaphorically replied "you cannae change the laws of physics, Guy" did not seem to hit home.

Deputy Duhamel had put forward the recent decision of the EU that any new incinerators will have to be at least 65% efficient (this refers to the electricity produced PLUS the waste heat which MUST be utilised in district heating schemes). Rob had pointed out that TTS' proposed incinerator would be around 24% efficient (this refers only to the amount of electricity that the plant would create) - TTS ruled out a district heating scheme a long time back as too expensive.

Guy then claimed that his incinerator would be 60% efficient which is what breaks the Laws of Thermodynamics - if one generates electricity from the steam that an incinerator produces to generate power then the theoretical maximum efficiency is in the vicinity of 30%. Guy's point is only valid if they were going to install a full scale district heating scheme but this is 100% NOT included in their £100 million odd costings. In short because of bluster and spin, incomprehension and incompetence, Guy was claiming that he could have his cake and eat it. The incinerator costings that he is going to put forward to the States on Tuesday do not include the "extras" that would make it comply with the latest EU directive on efficiency

[gagged]

I think Duhamel came out of that interview OWNING De Faye. Nick you made a very good point, but your effort was not needed to make De Faye look like a complete self serving ill researched Walkerite, but was much appreciated.

[crappogre]

How come people are maintaining that incinerator emmissions from La Collette will be mostly blown out to sea? Aren't our prevailing winds from the south-west? It will dump airborne toxins all over Havre des Pas and just about anywhere east of the Fort in varying quantities?
Winds from the north (required to blow the poison out to sea) are fairly infrequent in comparison, are they not?

[davroslesueur]

"blow the poison out to sea"
That's great isn't it

[Jeremy Strickland]

According to the Department of Health's Air Quality Strategy for Jersey the prevailing winds are: SW:W:NW.
www.gov.je/Health/public_health/health_protection/pollution/Air+Quality+Stratergy+for+Jersey.htm


If we are to go with the incinerator solution then may I suggest somewhere on the East of the island. In fact Haut de la Garenne may be suitable. We would also not need to relocate the fuel farm at La Collette.

[nickpalmer]

Jul 7, 2008 9:47:55 GMT @davroslesueur said:

"blow the poison out to sea"
That's great isn't it

Well I hate to disagree with someone who seems anti-incinerator but any new incinerator RUN PROPERLY would not actually have harmful emissions because a fair proportion of the £100 million is for gas cleaning equipment. I hope people will trust me on this because I am about as anti-incinerator as you can get locally and it is not helpful to pass on untruths - it can weaken our case by reducing credibility.

Recently there has been concern raised about "PM2.5" particles which are emitted from just about any combustion process including incinerators, cars, bonfires, cigarettes etc. The actual toxicity of these are largely related to the toxicity of what was burnt thus if one burns materials including acidic substances, heavy or volatile metals (mercury) then the PM2.5's will be toxic. Clearly, the way to avoid this toxicity is to avoid burning toxicity generating materials in the first place. If one has to separate the rubbish in advance of being burnt then one might as well recycle it because most of the effort and relative inconvenience and cost of recycling is in the collection and separation stages.

Try and see a copy of St Helier's "Town Crier" (just released) which announces that Didier Monier from the Dinan area is keen to import a lot of Jersey's recyclable material into France. Known to the Scrutiny panel (he was invited to present at the recent Town hall exhibition on alternatives to an incinerator) his initiative actually holds out a promise that he will be able to take so much of the recyclable fraction of the Island's waste (paper, card, plastic, wood, tyres etc) that within a few years it is very possible that any new incinerator would have to close down because the calorific value (burnability) of the residual waste would have fallen to such a low value that it simply could no longer be incinerated! It would be a giant white elephant monument to the Department of Expensive c**k-ups

[crappogre]

aha, glad we've got some interest on this issue - can any of you tell me (out of interest) what was wrong with the STAG proposal from a few years back? Weren't we offered the chance to be guinea pigs free of charge for a pressurised system of some sort which was a win win win scenario somehow? As you can see, I can't remember much about it - but I've always wondered whether it was genuine or a snake oil product?

[nickpalmer]

Jul 7, 2008 15:13:31 GMT crappogre said:

can any of you tell me (out of interest) what was wrong with the STAG proposal from a few years back?

It was largely that the system was untested. Although it put together various items of technology, they had not been tested to work together reliably. Plus, Dr Haydn Taylor did not inspire confidence in the reliability of his guarantees.

This quality of robustness is one that TTS have insisted on from the start because Jersey has little storage space for rubbish, and no back up landfill space in the event of major breakdowns. It is, on the face of it, sensible however to order an ultra reliable horse and cart just as the motor car is invented is not sensible if, as is the case, any plant that we commission will be around for about 30 years. Even if an incinerator would be ultra reliable it will be almost certainly obsolete within a few years as the composition of the residual waste changes so that it becomes virtually unburnable. The modular alternatives are much more resistant to the changes and are far more flexible in this scenario.

[crappogre]

thanks - so what's the answer then?

[nickpalmer]

The Environment Scrutiny panel's portfolio of technology including anaerobic digestion, pyrolysis/gasification plus increased recycling rates and schemes is workable now and will increasingly be so as waste composition changes over the decade ahead as the Green initiative takes hold. Ignored in TTS' outlook is that infrastructure, methods of manufacturing and packaging of goods and transport will change radically to be more environmentally sustainable. This will be an exponential change over the years to come as the synergies come into play.

[crappogre]

Anything has to be better than shipping it off to France, not very sustainable is it?

I just hope that a long-term sustainable solution is adopted, not just a short-term fix that doesn't take into account any sustainability issues. I won't hold my breath though!

[Jersey Forum Admin]

Jul 8, 2008 9:39:28 GMT crappogre said:

Anything has to be better than shipping it off to France, not very sustainable is it?

Once we get that bridge built you'll see the light!

[nickpalmer]

edit after debate:

30v21 in favour of TTS and the giant "a cloud comes over the sun" incinerator. Let's start a competition to name the white elephant! I bags Dumbo!