DUBLINDUBLINDUBLINDUBLIN WASTEWASTE WASTEWASTE TOTO TOTO ENERGYENERGY ENERGYENERGY PROJECTPROJECT PROJECTPROJECT

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

ENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTALENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTIMPACT IMPACTIMPACT STATEMENTSTATEMENT STATEMENTSTATEMENT

www.DUBLINWASTETOENERGY.IE www.DUBLINWASTETOENERGY.IE

Volume 2 of 3 Appendices to EIS June 2006

60 mm

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02 Volume 2 of 3 Appendices to EIS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DUBLIN WASTE TO ENERGY PROJECT DUBLIN WASTE TO ENERGY PROJECT

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

June 2006

60 mm

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02 Environmental Impact Statement 1 Appendices to chapter 1 Volume 2 of 3 Appendices to EIS 2 Appendices to chapter 2 3 Chapter 3 – N/A 4 Appendices to chapter 4 5 Appendices to chapter 5 6 Appendices to chapter 6 7 Appendices to chapter 7 8 Appendices to chapter 8 9 Appendices to chapter 9 10 Chapter 10 – N/A 11 Appendices to chapter 11 12 Appendices to chapter 12 13 Appendices to chapter 13 14 Appendices to chapter 14 15 Appendices to chapter 15 16 Appendices to chapter 16 17 Appendices to chapter 17 18 Chapter 18 – N/A

For inspection purposes only. 19Consent of copyrightChapter owner required 19 for– anyN/A other use.

20 Chapter 20 – N/A 21 Chapter 21 – N/A

Elsam Engineering A/S Kraftværksvej 53 DK-7000 Fredericia Phone: +45 79 23 33 33 Fax: + 45 75 56 44 77

www. elsam-eng.com

Reg. no. 10650798

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02

Chapter Appendix Title

1 Appendix 1.1 References to selected materials from the public domain

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02 Appendix 1.1

Appendix 1.1 contains references to selected materials from the public domain.

1.2 Report on residues from thermal treatment 1.3 Report on Siting and Environmental Issues 1.4 Report on waste quantities 1.5 Baseline Monitoring Volume 1 Main Report 1.6 Baseline Monitoring Volume 2 Technical Appendices 1.7 Baseline Monitoring Volume 3 Technical Appendices 1.8 Soil and Groundwater Investigation at the Proposed Dublin Waste to Energy site in Ringsend, Dublin 1.10 Waste Management Plan for the Dublin region

The materials are made available on www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02

Chapter Appendix Title

2 Appendix 2.1 Publications Appendix 2.2 CIG Report LEGAL OPINION - In relation to siting of a Appendix 2.3 proposed incinerator /thermal treatment plant at Poolbeg in Dublin

Appendix 2.4 Issues, Questions and Concerns of the Community

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02 Dublin Waste to Energy Project

VOLUME 1 / ISSUE 2 / APRIL 2002 Experts divided on solution

No fewer than seven well known experts, highly respected nationally and internationally, accepted invitations from the Community Interest Group to speak at the Group’s meetings in February and March. The Group wanted to hear the experts’ opinions and take the opportunity to ask them questions about Dublin City Council’s proposal to site a thermal treatment plant on the Poolbeg peninsula. As often happens, all the experts didn’t agree with each other and Members of the CIG and observers at the meeting didn’t agree with all the experts. The meetings were really lively and so interesting, they went on a lot longer than usual. Here is an overview of what each expert felt:

Dr Jim Wilson Hendrik Van der Kamp “...undertake studies “CIG members have in Dublin Bay, in a real opportunity to advance of any get involved in the thermal treatment planning process before plant being built..” the statutory process begins in 2004”. Karin Dubsky For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. “...do we need an Frank McDonald incinerator / thermal “..enforcing waste Recycling treatment plant at all, management legislation if we are at the peak of is the key to making and Rhythms waste generation now?” progress”.

Prof Yvonne Scannell ON A POSITIVE NOTE! “...the CIG process Martin Hederman Robinson As part of the commitment to allows you to influence achieving their 60% recycling what will happen and “The EU priority is to target, Dublin City Council has individuals can enforce divert biodegradable embarked on one of its most environmental law”. waste from landfill”. imaginative and exciting recycling initiatives to date. Recycling Dr Conor Skehan Rhythms is a project for Primary Schools that incorporates waste “...have realistic Reduction, Reuse and Recycling expectations, know with the joy of making music. what you can expect More details of all seven continued on back page... from the EIS process”. experts on the next page

INSIDE: Detailed chart for the Facts and figures on how we New waste policy will charge timeline of the Waste fair against our European by weight to Energy Project neighbours

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02 Conor Skehan advised the Group not to fight against the proposed plant on emotive grounds. “Issues like emissions Community Interest from the chimney stack will not succeed, since modern thermal treatment plants or incinerators, if properly run, are not dangerous”, he said. “Rather, people should Group hears from experts concentrate on the effects of the proposed plant on the community; traffic, fauna, wintering geese etc.” All the facts will be published in the EIS for the project, Conor Skehan confirmed. By participating in the CIG, local people have the best of both worlds, he concluded. Continued from page one... “You can have your cake and eat it”. People can make sure the best possible application is made and then object to it At the meeting in February Dr. Jim Wilson, Senior Lecturer in Environmental Science, Trinity when the statutory process starts. He went on to say that College and Karin Dubsky, Environmentalist and Director of Coastwatch Ireland both gave CIG members are not doing themselves any harm by short presentations and answered questions from the Group and observers in the audience. participating and are not losing any rights. The only At the meeting in March speakers included Prof Yvonne Scannell from Trinity College; Dr. downside Conor Skehan could see is that people may Conor Skeehan CAAS Environmental Services; Hendrik Van der Kamp from the DIT; Frank lose objectivity through their familiarity with the project. McDonald from the Irish Times and Martin Hedemann Robinson from the EU Commission. “Have realistic expectations”, he concluded. “Know what you can expect from the EIS process”. MORE COMPREHENSIVE METHOD FOR SITING STUDY SUGGESTED Hendrik Van der Kamp, Head of Planning and Development Department, DIT, Bolton Street, Dublin 2 has already written a report for the CIG, looking at the planning process as it relates to the siting study for Poolbeg. Describing the CIG process as being “very innovative and novel”, he told the Group Members that they have a real opportunity to get involved in the planning process before the statutory process begins in 2004. He confirmed the siting process was rational, correct, systematic and in accordance with the normal siting process you might expect. “A very meticulous process and very explicit.” MCOS who did the siting study looked at all the suitably zoned areas and created their short list. Hendrik suggested a more comprehensive approach could also have been tried, which might have required a Material Contravention or a variation of the Development Plan for the City or the three other Dublin Local Authorities. This would have involved MCOS looking at all land in the region, regardless of zoning and picking the best site NEED FOR STUDIES IN ADVANCE told the Members of the Group that the CIG is a process and then looking to have the site rezoned or getting which allows them to influence what will happen and they Dr Jim Wilson, Senior Lecturer Environmental Science, planning permission by material contravention. could ensure advantages for their community in doing so. Trinity College, stressed the importance of undertaking studies She advised the Group to concentrate on the future rather (However, Prof Scannell, who said she was neither for in Dublin Bay, in advance of any thermal treatment plant than on what has or has not happened in the past. “You’re or against the project, interjected to say that a developer being built in the area, to determine the existing contaminant in a policy forum which allows you to influence what directed to look for planning permission on a site that did loads on the Bay and the assimilative capacity. He spoke of the happens from now on,” she said. not have the correct zoning could take legal action based economic, scientific and recreational value of the estuary and For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. on the fact that this is an unreasonable request.) the Bay and said the impact of a modern incinerator on the Prof Scannell said Case Law shows that traffic and property marine environment would be relatively slight. Far-field values are the two main issues on which proposals such as ENFORCEMENT IS THE KEY this are fought. She identified the following areas which impact would come through air emissions to the atmosphere Frank McDonald, Environment Editor of The Irish Times could be useful for local people who want to fight the as the prevailing winds blow out into the Irish sea. and author of three books on Dublin said that enforcement proposed project; IMPORTANT ISSUES FOR SCOPING of waste legislation is key to making progress with the needs • Traffic to be addressed. An article he wrote that day on the latest Karin Dubsky, Coastwatch Ireland wondered if an • Neighbourhood amenities thinking from the Department of the Environment & Local incinerator/thermal treatment plant is needed at all, since • Heritage considerations Government is re-produced on the back page. we could be at the peak of waste generation now. As recycling • Individual and public authority enforcement SAFETY ISSUES OF PARAMOUNT levels continue to increase, we could be planning for a large • Air Pollution amount of waste that won’t be there any more. Some IMPORTANCE TO EU incinerators work brilliantly, “the technology is there,” “Anyone in Ireland can enforce environmental law”, but she asked how our local authorities would act if there Professor Scannell concluded. “We are unique in Europe Martin Hederman Robinson, a Brussels based lawyer from were a problem. Our history of monitoring, compliance and in that anyone can appeal against planning permission or the European Commission’s DG Environment, EU Unit for trust is not good. She advised the Members of the CIG that the granting of a waste license.” Sustainable Development represented Marianna Klingbeil, his Head of Department. His Unit enforces environment neither the EU Habitats Directive nor the Bird Directive is ‘WHAT IT’S LIKE TO LIVE HERE’ likely to be of help in any campaign to stop the proposed law and tries to develop best standards throughout the EU. project. She also said that nature can be helped and suggested IS THE BASIS FOR FIGHTING PROJECT Safety issues remain the touchstone of EU policy, he confirmed. “The EU priority is to divert biodegradable waste that local residents should ensure that when the impact on Conor Skehan, Managing Director of CAAS Environmental from landfill, not to force incineration or recycling on any the site is studied, the former natural status of the site should Services Ltd and Environmental Impacts Services Ltd State. The EU has a neutral view. It’s up to each Member be considered as the baseline for any study. This is a very specialises in the prediction and evaluation of the impacts State to come up with its own plan.” important recommendation to the CIG, which should be of large scale projects. Conor addressed the group on a included in the scoping for environmental impact assessment. Pro Bono basis and advised the CIG to “listen very carefully” DG Environment has responsibility for handling complaints ANYONE IN IRELAND CAN ENFORCE to Prof Scannell’s advice that they look to the future when to ensure community law is enforced. The way the system deciding on their approach to the project . “Participate from works is that the European Commission writes to the ENVIRONMENTAL LAW the beginning”, he suggested. “Decide, if we’re going to have Member State Government to ask for an explanation about Prof Yvonne Scannell lectures in Environmental Law and thermal treatment, it’ll be the best”. Or alternatively, decide complaints made by EU citizens or organisations. “It’s not Policy at Trinity College. She agreed to come to the meeting “we’ll stop this project and use the Environmental Impact immediate. It takes a long time, but it is possible for a because she thought the CIG process “very interesting”. She Statement to demonstrate this is an impossible site.” member of the public to get an informal view from the EU Commission on technical aspects of any complaint”.

DID YOU KNOW? The Dublin Region produces over 2m tonnes of waste, almost all of which goes to landfill. If we succeed in diverting 50% of this waste from landfill by 2006 in line with Government targets, 1m tonnes annually will remain.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02 Waste to Energy Project Timeline

This is the proposed timeline for the IMPORTANT FOR COMMUNITY TO BE Dublin Waste to Energy Project. It shows INVOLVED EARLY IN THE PROJECT the role of the Client Representative Matt Twomey, Assistant City Manager attended the February Facts & Figures (Project Team) and the Community and March meetings. He confirmed that Dublin City Council Interest Group. A developer will be is following a schedule to appoint a developer and commence the statutory process in late 2003. The developer will be DUBLIN - WASTE MANAGEMENT IN 2000 appointed in late 2003 who will undertake appointed following a procurement/ selection process, the the statutory process. Only after planning guidelines for which are set by Dublin City Council. Included permission and the necessary licences in the guidelines for prospective developers will be Terms of have been obtained can a thermal Reference for Environmental Scoping. treatment plant be built. The CIG are ‘Scoping’ outlines (in general terms), the environmental impacts the developer will be obliged to study in detail preparing, with the help of experts, when the environmental impact assessment is being for the statutory process. compiled. Any comments that the Members of the CIG put forward in relation to scoping, will be included in the Terms of Reference and passed on to the developer as part THE CIG PROCESS of their contract. The guideline documents (or procurement The CIG process was set up by Dublin City Council last documents) will be finalised by the end of April 2002. September. The role of the Community Interest Group is Comments made after this point will also be passed on DUBLIN - WASTE MANAGEMENT to reflect the views and concerns that their community have to the eventual developer for consideration, although they TARGETS FOR 2014 about thermal treatment. The statutory consultation process will not form part of the contract. will not start until 2004, when the necessary planning and The statutory public consultation phase will not begin until licencing applications will be prepared. The local authority For inspection purposes only. a developerConsent is chosen of copyright in late owner 2003. required Dublin for any City other Council use. is feels that the proposal is too important to wait until 2004 committed to providing information, as it becomes available, for the community to have access to valid, up to date to the local community, between now and then. information. The voluntary Community Interest Group is an innovative initiative. It consists of 18 men and women NEXT CIG MEETING picked by an Independent Selection Committee to reflect The next meeting of the Community Interest Group will the local community’s concerns. be held on Tuesday 9th April 2002. Invited experts include Four facilitated meetings have taken place to provide Prof Dr Dieter Schrenk and Paul Johnston who will both a forum where they can voice their concerns and/or talk about the health aspects of thermal treatment; opposition to the proposed project. A further meeting is Dr. Andrew Farmer will talk about air quality and Donal WASTE MANAGEMENT IN EUROPE planned with experts selected by the group, being invited Mathews from Dublin City Council will talk about traffic. to give presentations. Members of the general public can 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Observers are welcome to attend. At the end of each attend meetings as observers. Austria meeting, observers are invited to comment/ask questions. Denm ark France Germany Italy What is Thermal Treatment? Netherlands Norway Thermal Treatment is the name given to a variety of technologies Spain (of which incineration is the best known) which reduce the volume of Sw eden waste prior to final disposal in a landfill. The process releases energy Sw itzerland from the waste, which can be used to create heat and electricity. U.K. Thermal treatment is used successfully throughout Europe Ire land to help achieve integrated waste management. Landfill Energy Com posting Recycling - Pictured here is Vienna’s thermal treatment plant. A modern facility in the city centre. Recovery

Are you concerned that there is not enough reduction, reuse and recycling of waste in your area? WORKSHOP Dublin City Council together with the Irish Wildlife Trust is hosting a Composting Workshop on the 15th of May in Ringsend. If you would like to know how to turn your kitchen waste into fertiliser then this workshop is for you. Contact Elizabeth Arnett (01 2815918) for details

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02 From Didgeridoos to bean-can Marakas...

...Continued from page one will also learn a lot about how much fun recycling can be’ says Mary Price, Principal of Pupils from Scoil Mhuire, Sandymount have been Scoil Mhuire.The project is also supported by very busy this term making musical instruments Wavin Pipes, who provide a lot of the materials from what other people throw in the bin. From for the pupils to make instruments out of. didgeridoos to bean-can marakas, this project brings to life the importance of recycling waste Assistant City Manager Matt Twomey said of the in as many different ways as possible. The aim project ‘Recycling Rhythms is a great initiative of the project is to the heighten awareness where the local authority, businesses and schools of waste issues, starting with primary school can come together to encourage recycling in children. Letting their imagination run wild a fun and educational way’. the children have made a wide variety of instruments from everyday objects that they found in the bin. Once the instruments are tuned they become part of the 90 piece recycled orchestra that is led by Gordon Douglas, the Project Co-ordinator. The culmination of the terms work is a concert where friends and family are invited to come to the school to learn about recycling and to listen to the children play their instruments. ‘This is a very exciting recycling and educational initiative that we have undertaken this term. The pupils and staff alike are getting a lot out of the project and I am sure that the parents who attend our concert

New waste policy will charge by weight

Householders are to be charged by have segregated waste collection and similar programmes The Minister announced that a National Waste Prevention weight for the waste they put out for have been "rolled out" in Galway, Nenagh, Waterford and Programme would be implemented by the Environmental parts of Meath and Louth. Protection Agency to eliminate production waste by collection within three years under For inspection purposes only. industries subject to ingrated pollution control licensing. There are nowConsent 1,300 of copyright "bring owner banks" required compared for any other to 400 use. in a new policy aimed at providing more 1994 and more than 200,000 tonnes of packaging waste - The policy statement places emphasis on producer incentives for re-use and recycling. 25 per cent of the total - was recycled last year. "More waste responsibility for waste. In addition to the recycling prevention plus more recycling equals less waste equals less of packaging and farm plastics, this will be extended to landfills", the Minister said. end-of-life vehicles, electrical and electronic equipment, The Minister for the Environment, Mr Dempsey, also builders' rubble, tyres and newspapers. announced yesterday that a new landfill levy will be imposed Under the regional waste management plans now being "Prevention is better than cure. We need to eliminate on all local authorities and private contractors from June 1st implemented, bring-bank density will increase from one waste from the earliest stages of resource extraction and - initially at €15 per tonne, increasing by €5 per year. to every 3,000 people to one for every 500 to 1,000 and segregated waste collection will be extended to most urban production. We also need to ensure that manufactured National bans on landfilling specific recyclable materials are centres "where economically feasible". products are more easily recycled and more environmentally also to be introduced this year to support greater recovery € friendly if they are discarded", he said. rates. A total of 10 material recovery facilities are to be The 127 million capital grant scheme under the National Thanking the public and retailers for their positive response developed under the programme, aided by a €127 million Development Plan will provide assistance for new "civic to the 15 cent levy on plastic bags, he stressed that the grant scheme. amenity sites", bring banks, transfer stations, material recovery facilities and composting and biological treatment revenue it generated - as well as the revenue from the A National Waste Management Board is to be established plants, Mr Dempsey said. landfill levy - would go to a new Environment Fund to |“as a matter of urgency” to co-ordinate, monitor, review and support a range of programmes. advise on all aspects of waste management policy, as well as He emphasised that the National Waste Management Board "I have already pledged a very significant proportion of a Recycling Consultative Forum and a Market Development would be "an active body, quickly put in place to support funding from the landfill levy to support dedicated and Group for recyclables. achievement of change". Its associated market development group would support recycling by developing new markets measurable enforcement initiatives aimed at controlling The new structure is one of the key elements of a major new for recylables. fly-tipping and unauthorised waste activities" - such as the policy statement, Preventing and Recycling Waste: Delivering illegal dumps in Co Wicklow. Change, which builds on Changing Our Ways, the 1998 The new board would be asked to advise on the development His priorities had always been waste minimisation, re-use, policy emphasising prevention, minimisation, reuse and of a national strategy on bio-degradable organic waste with recycling and finally disposal. "Yet the debate in Ireland has recycling. a view to creating marketable compost products from this waste and support the development of widespread home all too often descended into arguments about incineration Mr Dempsey made his announcement at the Oxigen composting. or landfilling. We have got to re-focus, to get back to basics", Materials Recycling Facility in Clonshaugh, near Dublin Mr Dempsey declared. Airport, where recyclable material from 150,000 households Mr Dempsey said market development was crucial to in the capital is sorted, segregated and baled for processing recycling. In this regard, he regretted last year's closure of the By Frank McDonald, Environment Editor into new products. Ispat Irish Steel plant in Cork Harbour and the recent bad news about Irish Glass. However, many businesses were © The Irish Times “We have made real progress in recycling in recent years,” turning to recycled materials. 13 March 2002 he said. By the end of this year, 250,000 Dublin homes will

This newsletter has been printed on 100% recycled paper. The use of this paper contributes to the removal of more than 100,000 tonnes of waste paper from the waste stream.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:02 Dublin Waste to Energy Project

VOLUME 1 / ISSUE 1 / NOVEMBER 2001 Community Interest Group wants more information

The Community Interest Group, set up to raise issues that concern the local community, held their first meeting on 9th October. They were insistent that they need to know more about the planning process for the various elements in Dublin’s Waste Management Plan and about the siting proposals for any thermal treatment plant. Only then, they say, will they be able to discuss specific issues like traffic, health concerns or plant emissions.

John Singleton, Dublin Corporation, told the Group that Dublin’s recycles 10% of waste and just 3% of household waste is recycled. Under the Waste Management Plan, 80% of Dublin householders will get a kerbside collection of recyclables. 100,000 Green Bins for dry recyclable Waste to Energy waste will be distributed by Dublin Corporation this year. He said that despite all the waste minimisation Project Update and education initiatives being taken all over Europe, the volume of waste continues to grow 3% each year. The first Community Interest Group meeting. The scale of the problem cannot be over-emphasised. For inspection purposes only. Dublin Corporation is currently Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. The two hour meeting covered issues ranging from Gunner Kjaer, COWI Client Representative who has carrying out Environmental Scoping people’s view that the proposed Poolbeg site is flawed, 40 years experience of thermal treatment in Denmark and this is expected to be completed to their concern that alternative means of transport would and who has managed the planning and construction by Spring 2002. The aim of be needed to accommodate the estimated 150 trucks that of one of Copenhagen’s two incinerators said that while Environmental Scoping is to identify would come to the plant on week days, in off peak hours. 40 years ago, incinerators were dirty plants, today a plant issues that should be covered in Existing high levels of industry in the area and the lack can be built with very little impact on the environment. of trust in Dublin Corporation, going back years, were He confirmed that no hazardous waste would be allowed the Environmental Impact Statement all discussed. in the proposed Dublin plant and that no particular type for a Waste to Energy plant on Three short presentations were made to the Group. of thermal treatment has been decided on yet. the Poolbeg Peninsula. Information Jean Clarke, Environmental Scientist at M.C. O’Sullivan The next Community Interest Group meeting will is being gathered from the public Ltd, Client Representative to Dublin Corporation, spoke be held on Tuesday 13th November at 6.45pm, in to ensure the issues of concern about the very ambitious recycling targets of 60% which Ringsend & District Community Centre, Thorncastle to local people are identified. have to be achieved in Dublin. She said the best option, Street. Observers are welcome to attend, to watch and The Community Interest Group environmentally, is to have the lowest possible percentage listen to the proceedings. is vital at this stage of the project of waste going to landfill and the maximum possible because their report, summarising being recycled. The remainder of the waste, about MAXIMUM RECYCLING INTEGRATED APPROACH the community’s concerns, will 25% in Dublin’s case, would be thermally treated, Recycling 60% Recycling 60% form an essential part of using incineration or another form of thermal treatment Landfill 40% Thermal Treatment 25% to generate energy from the waste. The energy would Landfill 15% the Environmental Scoping be used to make electricity or to provide heating for process. local industries. 72% of Dubliners agree with the Integrated Approach. (Lansdowne Market Survey)

INSIDE: We answer some questions We take a look at the latest raised at our first open day Bring Centre at the Old in Ringsend Pumping Station.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03 Open Day in Ringsend

The first of many Open Days to inform people about the proposal to develop a waste to energy plant, listen to people’s views and encourage them to get involved in the debate was held on Thursday 14th June in Clanna Gael Fontenoy GAA Club, Ringsend.

Over 100 local people came along on the day to meet representatives from Dublin Corporation as well as specialists on air quality, traffic, human health and planning issues. “It was encouraging to meet so many people at the Open Day who are genuinely interested in recycling and composting their household waste,” says Matt Twomey, Assistant City Manager. Your questions and answers at the first open day:

How was Poolbeg Peninsula chosen What is Dublin’s “Integrated Waste Q as the preferred location? Q Management Plan”?

Dublin Corporation commissioned consultants Dublin householders produce more than 400,000 A to carry out a siting study to select a preferred A tonnes of waste annually. Dublin Corporation location for the Dublin Waste to Energy Plant is working with South Dublin, Fingal and Dun in November 1999. They assessed the entire Laoghaire-Rathdown County Councils to reduce Dublin Region and excluded areas that were dependence on landfill from the current figure inappropriate because of zoning criteria, of over 90% to just 15% within ten years. The the existence of environmental designations For inspection purposes only. aim is to recycle 59% of waste, thermally treat Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. that prohibit or limit development, areas 25% with energy/heat recovery and only landfill of archeological interest or restrictions on 16%. “Even with maximum recycling levels development near airports and height restrictions of 60%, we still have to dispose of 40% of in flight paths. A shortlist of ten sites was Dublin‘s waste,” says Matt Twomey, Assistant compiled following assessment of the areas City Manager. “No single option on its own is that did not contain exclusionary factors. the answer, but a carefully chosen combination These sites were further assessed with regard of Reduction, Recycling, Thermal Treatment to their proximity to waste sources, roads/access, with energy recovery and landfill provides the traffic impacts, uses of electricity and heat, site best waste management solution for Dublin.” size and land available, distance to residential areas and a further assessment of planning and The plan includes:- environmental issues. This assessment was used • A proposed new landfill for the Dublin to rank the four most suitable sites. The Poolbeg Q What makes Poolbeg Peninsula Region Peninsula site was identified as the preferred site. the preferred location? • Two biological treatment plants to recycle 90,000 tonnes of organic and food waste • Land is available with suitable zoning • Householders are being provided with green A • There is strong potential for supplying recycling bins for paper, packaging and cans; heat / energy created from thermal treatment brown bins for organic and food waste to other industries on the peninsula will be provided in 2002/2003. • It is further away from residential areas • New and enhanced Bring Centres than the other sites identified are being provided throughout Dublin • Planned road development will make • Two garden waste recycling centres it accessible from every part of Dublin are open in Contarf and Lucan • There would be minimum visual intrusion • Recycling Centres will be developed in because of the existing chimney stacks 10 Dublin locations for bulky waste like on the peninsula old fridges, furniture and other recyclables • It is close to the City - Dublin’s main • Thermal treatment of the remaining waste producer municipal waste

DID YOU KNOW? On average, we produce 17.5 kg (38.46 lb) of waste per household each week in Ireland? That’s 1.220 million tonnes of household waste per year.

– Source, EPA National Waste Database 1998

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03 Meet John Have you met John O’Shea yet? If not, why not?

You can bring your paper, cardboard, plastic, glass, helping you achieve waste minimisation and has cans, old clothes, household batteries and garden waste agreed to give a FREE “Bag for Life” to the first fifty to Londonbridge Road Bring Centre for recycling. customers who present this edition of Waste-Wise. Go on - it makes sense. You can contact the centre by phoning 4977291. All waste brought to the centre is recycled through companies such as Irish Glass, Hannay Paper and Plastic Recycling and Hammond Lane Metal Recycling Works. MAKE A CHANGE... If we are to achieve Dublin’s target of 60% recycling, then we will all have to play our part. Why not think John O’Shea is ready to meet you and to help you about your own behaviour and make one change recycle as much of your waste as possible and by all every week for the better? Why not start by accounts, he is a very busy man! Dublin Corporation minimising and reusing? recently opened its latest Bring Centre at the This week, buy yourself a reusable shopping bag and Old Pumping Station, Londonbridge Road. stop taking home so many plastic bags from the shops. This is where you can find John on Mon-Thurs It is a simple thing to do but will have a huge impact from 10.00 am to 4.00pm; Friday from 10.00 am on the amount of waste you generate. Your local to 1.00pm and John will even come in on Saturday TESCO in Sandymount village is committed to from 10.00am to 4.00pm.

Timeline for the Waste to Energy Project

1997 DUBLIN WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY: The study identified the site on the Poolbeg Peninsula SUMMARY OF PLANNING PROCESS After extensive public consultation throughout the as the emerging preferred site. Dublin Region, the strategy for dealing with Dublin’s STEP1: waste was published. The four Dublin Local Authorities 2001 DUBLIN WASTE TO ENERGY Planning permission requested from the planning (Dublin Corporation and Fingal, South Dublin and authority. Individuals can make submissions PROJECT For inspection purposes only. Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Councils) approved Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. STEP 2: the strategy in principle at the end of 1997. JANUARY 2001: Within two months the authority has to respond 1998: Local Communications Co-ordinator appointed. to the application and may request further information The Government issued the policy statement Information service opened in Dublin Corporation’s STEP 3: Waste Management - Changing Our Ways. Regional Office, Ringsend Further information supplied by developer

1999 DUBLIN WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN: MAY 2001: STEP 4: In October 1998, a Draft Waste Management Plan Independent Selection Committee appointed The authority has to make a decision within two for Dublin was distributed and displayed for public JUNE 2001: months of receiving the additional information comment. A final version of the plan, incorporating the Public Open Day. Promotion of Community Interest STEP 5: views of the public, was adopted by Dublin Corporation Group and invitation for applications Three weeks prior to granting permission the authority in December 1998. AUGUST 2001: has to issue notification of the decision to grant An Environmental Awareness Officer was appointed by Community Interest Group appointed. permission. The public can make more submissions Dublin Corporation, the first time such an appointment Informal Meeting of the Community Interest Group at this stage. was made by a Local Authority in the history of the State. OCTOBER 2001 - MARCH 2002: STEP 6:

1999 FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THERMAL TREATMENT Community Interest Group Meetings Planning permission is granted. OF WASTE FOR THE DUBLIN REGION: APRIL 2002: STEP 7: This report includes a document on environmental and Community Interest Group Report Within one month of the authority granting siting issues relating to thermal treatment. Part of the planning permission, submissions can be made SPRING 2002: public consultation carried out at this stage included to An Bord Pleanala. Environmental Scoping Document completed a public opinion survey that indicated 74% of people STEP 8: approved of thermal treatment as part of an overall WINTER 2002/SPRING 2003: An Bord Pleanala decides on the case. As there can be integrated approach to waste management. Focus Developer appointed. Developer begins planning an oral hearing involved and because there is no statutory groups were used to determine what, according process. Detailed site investigation. Environmental limitation on the length of time the Board can take to Dublin people, are important criteria that must Impact Statement commenced. on a decision, it is impossible to predict accurately be considered when identifying an appropriate site how long this part of the planning process will take. for a thermal treatment plant.

DID YOU KNOW? In Ireland we drink 100,000 million aluminium cans of soft drink and beer each year

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03 Wild on the Peninsula

Take a closer look...

Have you ever strolled along the Poolbeg Peninsula and stopped to admire the view of Dublin’s unique coastline with the City and Wicklow Mountains forming a beautiful backdrop? Or have you ever walked through Irishtown Nature Park on your way to the Shelly Banks or the Poolbeg Lighthouse? Many of us who live and work in the area have often taken the opportunity to feel the sea breeze on our faces and enjoy the sights and sounds of one of Dublin’s exceptional areas. Pictured here are some of the diverse flora that can be found along the Poolbeg Peninsula, including (clockwise from top left): Cow Parsley, Sea Mayweed, Valarian and Lady’s Bed Straw.

But how many of us have ever taken the time to stop Here to help and really look at what is around us. How many of us have a knowledge and understanding of the wildlife that make the peninsula such a pleasant place to spend an afternoon?

Through a series of articles we hope to give you an insight into the diversity of the flora and fauna that can be found on the Peninsula. We hope that this insight will enhance your enjoyment and appreciation of the area.

While summer is the time for most plants, there are a lot of species that are still looking splendid, even this Marram Grass along the Poolbeg Peninsula late in the season. plant and if you see and smell it next summer, you will know why, in days of old, it was used as bedding Pictured here are the team at Cambridge House, A very popular plant is Sea Mayweed, which covers the Dublin Corporation's Ringsend Regional office, for ladies. Spectacular in both colour and form are the peninsula in bright cheerful white and yellow flowers. (l-r) Leo Lawlor, Denise Cleary, Peter Morley For inspection purposes only. various types of grasses that cover the dunes and spread This large Consentdaisy canof copyright be seen owner at almostrequired forall any times other duringuse. (Area Manager) and Elizabeth Arnett (Local out over most of the open spaces on the peninsula. the year and is still in bloom at the moment - so keep Communications Co-ordinator). Marram grass is a common but particularly nice plant an eye out for it. Another plant currently in flower is If you need more information on the project, contact: that is very important in coastal zones. Sedges are also Sea Rocket, which can come in various different hues. common and you may recognise the Pendulous sedge Elizabeth Arnett, Colour is something the peninsula is never short of and the next time you go walking. Local Communications Co-ordinator plants like Valarian, and Gladiolus illyricus (which will Dublin Corporation Regional Office flower again next summer) certainly add much to the The Poolbeg Peninsula is an exciting place for really Cambridge House, Cambridge Road area. The diverse nature of the flora on the peninsula keen botanists. A local specimen of Stiff Sand Grass Ringsend, Dublin 4. also enhances the insect life. A very important species for that was recently examined by staff from the National Tel: (01) 2815918 Fax: (01) 2815919 attracting butterflies, with its elegant tall structure and Botanical Gardens displayed unique morphological email: [email protected] creamy white flowers, is cow parsley. The peninsula is also features - longer spikelets and up to 13 florets instead awash with species that perfume the air when they are in of a maximum of 10! bloom. Lady’s bed straw is a good example of a perfumed RAP encourages discussion All of these species add to the beauty and the diversity of the wildlife in the area. Next time you are out for a walk see if you can recognise any of them - but hurry, the There is nothing stopping people who seasons are changing quickly and you may have to wait were not selected for the Community until next summer to see them looking this lovely again. Interest Group from forming a shadow WATCH OUT! interest group and attending all of the Look out for the Brent Geese that are returning from CIG meetings as observers. RAP is willing the North to spend the winter with us. In our next issue to lend a hand in assisting a shadow group we will feature the geese and other migratory birds that to bring the issues out into the public can be found on the peninsula. arena for discussion. Contact RAP at Many thanks to Lorna Kelly, Sandymount/Merrion tel: 6607558 for more information. Residents’ Association, for her assistance with this article. Stiff Sand Grass

This newsletter has been printed on 100% recycled paper. The use of this paper contributes to the removal of more than 100,000 tonnes of waste paper.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

VOLUME 1 / ISSUE 3 / OCTOBER 2002 CIG Secures Legal Advice

Prof Dr Dieter Schrenk, World Health Organisation dioxin consultant, Dr Paul Johnston, Toxicologist with Greenpeace and www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie Dr Andrew Farmer from the Institute of European Environmental Policy who addressed the Community Interest Group last April.

The Community Interest Group (CIG) Members of the CIG chose Lavelle Coleman Solicitors to work with them and they will report their findings to the raised many issues in relation to the CIG shortly. Part of the issues to be examined on behalf Website steps taken by Dublin City Council of the community include: towards the possibility of constructing a 1.Were all proper studies and procedures carried out to The Dublin Waste to Energy Project has select the ‘preferred site’ considering the City Manager thermal treatment plant on the Poolbeg launched a new website. It contains stated that v ariations For inspection of the purposes Development only. Plan(s) could beConsent carried of copyright out if ownernecessary? required for any other use. Peninsula. Members want to be sure that information about the project including Dublin City Council has done everything 2.What authority does the City Manager have to procure a thermal treatment plant in Dublin? Dublin's Waste Management Plan, legally correct throughout the process so Within the remit of the Waste Management Plan, explanations of different types of far. To help clarify all of the issues does he have an option of not procuring a thermal treatment plant? thermal treatment, details about public raised, the CIG ensured that Dublin City Lavelle Coleman are working on behalf of the CIG for involvement and lots more. The address Council agreed to pay for an independent the benefit of the whole community and will be issuing a is www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie, so check legal team to advise the CIG and assist report to the CIG on their findings shortly. If you would like a copy of the report – contact the Ringsend Regional it out and email us with your comments them in reviewing the legal issues. Office – 01 2815918. or questions.

CIG Update Remember, if you don't have access to the Internet and would like to look at the Since the issue of Wastewise was circulated in April, the Experts who have spoken to the group since April include: site, there is free public internet access Community Interest Group has had three more meetings • Dr Paul Johnston - Toxicologist with Greenpeace to get more information from international experts and • Dr. Dieter Schrenk - Consultant Toxicologist for the purpose of researching waste to discuss how the CIG can best report back to the with World Health Organisation issues in the Ringsend Regional Office community. One member of the group took the • Dr. Andrew Farmer - Institute for European opportunity to visit a Municipal Waste Incinerator in Environmental Policy from 9am-5pm daily. London and the group, with the support of Dublin • Owen Madden - Dublin City Council Traffic City Council, appointed and briefed a legal team to • Denis Fitzgerald - Met Eireann help answer some of their questions - see inside for • Henk van der Kamp - Head of Planning, more details. DIT Bolton Street (Back by popular demand!)

INSIDE: CIG advised by Expert calls for air Greenpeace. quality monitoring to begin in Ringsend.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

Waste to Energy Project Timeline

CIG TO REPORT BACK TO THE COMMUNITY Expressions of The Community Interest Group has been meeting on behalf of their community for over a year now, to identify the issues that are of concern to the community with regard to the proposed siting of a thermal treatment plant on the Interest Sought Poolbeg Peninsula. The group have had seven official meetings, numerous meetings of their own, heard from international and national experts on a wide range of issues, appointed, briefed and had advice from their own legal team and one In July of this year the procurement process for member has gone, on behalf of the Group, to see a thermal treatment plant in London. A lot has happened and the group the Dublin Waste to Energy Project began with an are currently putting together a report on their activities. Their report will be available to the wider community and will advertisement in the Official Journal, for service be on the new website. Mr Matt Twomey, Assistant City Manager, Dublin City Council thanked the Members of the CIG providers who may be interested in tendering for the for their commitment to the process. Being part of the CIG does not affect the rights of individuals to object to the project. The procurement process, which is strictly proposed project. It does however, ensure that people know all about the proposed project and provides a forum for the regulated, will decide which service provider will community's concerns to be taken into account. ultimately design, build, operate and finance the plant. It is hoped that the successful service provider will be Not all of the information needs of the community can be addressed by Dublin City Council at this early stage, selected at the end of 2003. as a lot of decisions in relation to the service provider and the type of technology to be used have yet to be made. Once the Service Provider is appointed, they will commence with the statutory planning and licensing However, the CIG process has raised many issues of concern that the community have and these concerns will process before they can proceed with building the plant. be brought forward to the scoping process for the Environmental Impact Assessment(EIA). Until the chosen Service Provider successfully completes the independent statutory processes, it will not be possible for the thermal treatment plant to be constructed on the WHAT IS ENVIRONMENTAL SCOPING? Poolbeg Peninsula. Environmental scoping is an exercise that identifies, will focus on all of the concerns and issues raised during

These processes will involve attaining: in general terms, theFor inspectionissues that purposes need only. to be examined in the the scoping exercise. The Community Interest Group Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. 1. Planning Approval from An Bord Pleannala Environmental Impact Statement.(EIS) Process has raised a number of very important issues relevant to scoping. Raising these issues of concern at this 2. A Licence from the Environmental Protection Agency The environmental impact statement will scrutinize all of early stage has ensured that they are examined properly 3. Permission from the Commission for Electricity the potential impacts that the proposed thermal treatment during the EIS. Regulation to generate and supply electricity. plant could have on the surrounding area. The statement

Dublin City Council Advertise Compulsory Purchase Order

Dublin City Council has indicated that the preferred site to locate a thermal treatment (Waste to Energy) facility for Dublin, is on the Poolbeg Peninsula. The preferred site which extends to approximately 6.2 hectares in size is shown on the map opposite- designated as “area under consideration”: Dublin City Council commenced the process of acquisition of the preferred site by means of a Compulsory Purchase Determination Order dated 22nd July 2002. The required formal notices have been served on the owners, lessees and occupiers of the lands in question. The order is subject to confirmation by An Bord Pleannala.

There are 52 strictly regulated municipal waste incinerators DID YOU KNOW? in Germany which contribute less than one percent to the country’s background dioxin levels

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

Green Peace Properly Monitored Thermal Toxicologist Treatment is safe - WHO Expert

Advises CIG Dr. Dieter Schrenk, German Consultant Toxicologist with the World Health Organisation told the CIG that there are there are 52 strictly regulated municipal waste incinerators Dr Paul Johnston from Greenpeace was one of the in Germany which contribute less than one percent to the country’s background experts that Members of the dioxin levels CIG requested to address their meeting. He explained In the case of dioxins, exposure or adverse health effects in the vicinity of a that the Greenpeace research long-term monitoring of modern Municipal Waste Incinerator,” he said. Studies into the effects of thermal modern municipal waste show no higher incidence of respiratory diseases in the treatment on health does incinerators, such as that vicinity of incinerators when compared to matched not say ‘we have a human impact’ but it does say in Stuttgart-Münster cohorts living in comparable areas without incinerators. that there ‘are problems (Germany) revealed that Studies have also shown that in the vicinity of a modern of uncertainty and lack of the emission level for MWI (municipal waste incinerator) in Augsburg evidence’. He expressed concern at the manner in which dioxins stayed well below (Germany) dioxin levels in soil can vary considerably. samples are taken from incinerators – they could be the limit value. However, the levels were completely unrelated to the greatly underestimated. His main message to the group MWI with respect to distance or direction. He suggested was ‘If modern incinerators operating to the highest “Studies on health effects that the CIG put forward the following questions to be standards do not have any impact, as it is claimed, of modern MWIs are rare,” said Dr Schrenk. “The major addressed during the Environmental Impact Assessment: then the CIG should be asking to what extent will reason for the limited number of studies is that, based on the incinerator run within the regulations’. the extremely low levels of emissions, immissions do not • What are the predictions for emissions? He went on to say that incinerators were not needed contribute to total exposure in a relevant way. “No health • What is the impact on Health quality? to comply with the landfill directive and that waste effects can be expected from the predicted additional • Will the EIS take account of all factors that reduction can be achieved by targeting the source of exposure.” waste, maximising recycling and dealing with the influence air quality including climate, wind bio residues. He highlighted Auckland, Australia and Dr Schrenk told the meeting that “There is no study direction and distance? Canada where Zero Waste is the target and said that in the scientific literature demonstrating an increase of • How will fly ash be treated? this is what we should be moving towards. He made a lot of suggestions that the CIG should put forward to Environmental Scoping. These include : 1. What alternative systems have been assessed as part of the Environmental Impact Assessment, i.e., have Dr Farmer, a Scientist with the Institute the potentials for recycling and re-use been fully Better Air Quality for European Environmental Policy, was explored? invited by the group to answer their 2. Has the siting of the proposed plant been based Monitoring Needed upon a full evaluation of prevailing local climatic questions in relation to air quality and conditions taking account of wind direction, potential for thermal inversions,aerosol and in Ringsend regulation. particulate interactions with other facilities?

3. What will be the composition of the waste stream For inspection purposesDr Farmer only. commented that themselves – from vehicles it can do most harm at street to be fed to the incinerator? Consent of copyright ownerthere required was for limited any other airuse. quality level but areas impacted by stack emissions are likely to be

4. What parameters will be monitored for stack monitoring in Dublin. The much further away due to dispersal” said Dr Farmer. emissions from the facility? Which of these will be levels don’t approach the monitored constantly and which will be monitored limits set by the EU for one He recommended that the CIG call for air quality on a periodic basis? hour peak concentrations, monitoring in the area so that data is available when the 5. Will dioxins and other chlorinated organics but the annual levels are EIA is undertaken. be monitored constantly? close to the limit. He Dr Farmer suggested the following are the key questions 6. Will brominated and mixed chloro-bromo dioxins advised the group to not to which the CIG need answers: be monitored? only focus on the emission 7. What facilities are designated for secure handling from the plant but also on • What is the air quality like now? and disposal of fly-ash arisings from the incinerator? the emissions from the trucks bringing in the waste. • How will the incinerator impact on that? 8. In order to furnish the incinerator with sufficient “It is also important to look at where emissions present fuel,will waste need to be transported from outside the immediate area? 9. Will there be baseline and follow up health studies?

Recycling Rhythms

Pupils in “Star of the Sea Boys National instruments from digeredoos to bean-can School” in Sandymount are the latest maracas and their orchestra sounds great! youngsters to take part in the Recycling If you are interested in Recycling Rhythms Rhythms which incorporates waste for your school, contact the Ringsend Reduction, Reuse and Recycling with the Regional Office – 01 2815918. joy of making music. Pupils made musical

DID YOU KNOW? Dublin City Council has appointed FIVE new Environmental Education officers - one for each area of the city!

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

Composting Workshop

Don’t Forget!

In 5000 BC the Chinese began composting householders are turning their kitchen and garden waste into useful fertiliser. The Bring Centre at the Old Pumping their waste and by 500 BC they had it To facilitate and encourage more composting in Ringsend Station, Londonbridge Road is open down to a fine art; 7000 years later in Dublin City Council, in partnership with the Irish Mon-Thurs 8.00am-4.00pm, Fridays Peatland Conservation Council, ran a composting Dublin, we are beginning to catch on! 10.00am-1.00pm and Saturday and workshop in Ringsend recently and it was well attended Composting is a simple, inexpensive and reliable method by more than 30 residents from the Ringsend, Irishtown Sunday 10.00am-4.00pm. You can bring of treating organic waste; that is fruit and vegetable and Sandymount areas. As part of Dublin City Council's peelings, newspaper and garden waste. Up to 50% of your own paper, cardboard, plastic, commitment to achieving the 60% recycling target set in household waste can be made up of an organic fraction, glass, cans, old clothes, household the Waste Management Plan, we hope to organise another which at the moment is going into landfills and causing composting workshop soon. If you would like to attend batteries and garden waste to huge environmental problems due to leachate please contact us at the Ringsend Regional Office. Londonbridge Road Bring Centre for (leakage of wastewater) and methane gas emissions. Or why not buy your own compact garden composter Home composters have been available from Dublin City recycling. Are you using this facility? for only ?25.40 from Dublin City Council, telephone Council for a long time now and increasingly Dublin 01-6722301 / 6723925 to order. Phone John for more details at 6683942.

Questionnaire

Did you know that Dublin City Council aims Yes ❑ No ❑ Do you agree that an improved waste Yes ❑ No ❑ to recycle 60% of household waste by 2012? management service with more recycling

For inspection purposesfacilities only. will be expensive to implement? ❑ Consent of copyright❑ owner required for any other use. Do you have a green wheeled bin for recycling? Yes No If yes, are you willing to pay for the service? Yes ❑ No ❑ If yes, how much recyclable material do you Full Bin ❑ Less than half ❑ put in your Green Bin for collection each month? Half-Full ❑ How can Dublin City Council best raise Leaflets Workshops Lectures awareness in waste management? Local media National media Website List five types of household waste that can be recycled in Dublin (circle your preferences)

Are you happy with Dublin City Council’s Yes ❑ No ❑ current waste management service?

Where is your local Bring Centre for recyclable materials? If no what should be improved?

How often do you visit your Weekly or more ❑ Every Fortnight ❑ What waste management systems local Bring Centre? Once a month ❑ Less than once a month ❑ would you like to learn more about? ❑ In your opinion, what is the most Home Composting environmentally friendly way to manage waste How and where materials are recycled ❑ (tick 1-4 in order of your choice, 1 = best method) What household items can be recycled and where ❑ Landfill ❑ Recycling ❑ Minimisation ❑ Thermal Treatment with energy recovery ❑ Other:

Do you compost kitchen and Yes ❑ No ❑ garden waste at present? Please return to the Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge House, Cambridge Road, Ringsend by 29 November 2002. Name and address optional. If no, why not?

If you would like more information about any aspect of the Dublin Waste to Energy Project, why not contact Elizabeth Arnett, Local Communications Co-Ordinator at the Dublin City Council, Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4. Ph 2815918

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

VOLUME 1 / ISSUE 4 / DECEMBER 2002 Dublin City Council Wins

Recycling Award Community Dublin City Council has won the Repak Local Authority of Interest Group the Year Award 2002 at the first Repak Recycling Awards at a ceremony in the Report Now Shelbourne Hotel in October. The awards were organised as Available part of Repak National Recycling Week and were developed to acknowledge For your copy of the Report contact and promote excellence the Ringsend Regional Office in recycling. Dublin City Council beat Dublin City Council established the CIG off competition from local process over a year ago. The role of the authorities throughout the group was to reflect the views and concerns Minister for Environment and Local Government, Martin Cullen with Mr Matt Twomey, country to win Repak Local Assistant City Manager and Andrew Hetherington of Repak. that the community has about thermal Authority of the Year Award treatment and highlight areas of concerns 2002 including the finalists Fingal County Council, In particular Dublin City Council has excelled in the for Environmental Impact Scoping. Tipperary North Riding County Council, Galway County areas of Household kerbside collection schemes, operation The statutory consultation process will Council and Mayo County Council. of multi-material recycling centres, placement of public not start until 2004, when the necessary The Council won the award for their outstanding bring banks and for their work in enforcing the Waste commitment to improving recycling facilities in Dublin. Management (Packaging) Regulations 1997. planning and licensing applications will For inspection purposes only. be prepared. The local authority feels Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. that the proposal is too important to wait until 2004 for the community to have access to valid, up-to-date information. The voluntary CIG when established consisted of 18 men and women to reflect the community’s concerns. Some members resigned before the end of the process.

Seven facilitated meetings have taken place; more than 20 unofficial meetings were also held; international experts were selected by the group to address their meetings; a legal More Green-Bins! team was selected and briefed by the group; there was a site visit and an independent After setting a huge target of 60% recycling Dublin City They do not want report writer was commissioned to assist Council are committed to bringing Recycling right to the group in putting their report together. Glass Food Waste your door. With the introduction of Green-Bins recycling Dublin City Council supported all of these Plastic Garden Waste couldn’t be easier – it’s on your doorstep. In the last few activities and are delighted that the CIG weeks 500 new Green-Wheelies were given good homes Milk / Juice Cartons Textiles have put together their report. in the Ringsend and Irishtown areas. Green-bins are emptied every four weeks, so you will Green-bins are greedy for your have to put them out 13 times a year. A calendar will Paper Light Card Packaging be provided to remind you when collections are due. Magazines Aluminium Cans and Steel Cans

INSIDE: Executive Summary of Report from Independent Legal Team

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

FROM ZERO TO 50…. Recycle it and Without breaking the speed limit!!! you may end up with a Ringsendophone!

The Green-Schools Committee Targets report on their success The biggest problem in our school, is the amount of The Ringsend Technical Institute has gone from waste paper we send to landfill every week. Our target is zero recycling to 50% recycling in just over a year! to minimise this as much as possible and to recycle a This amazing achievement is the work of a very massive 50% of our waste. dedicated Green-Schools Committee who set about reversing the trend of no recycling in their schools. Paper Bins We put specially made paper bins throughout the school We’ve been working very hard since October 2001 and these bins are emptied into out Green-Wheelie bins to ensure that our school is awarded the European that have been provided by Dublin City Council This is exactly what the pupils of the 3rd to 6th classes, Green Flag which is given to those schools in Europe St Patrick’s Girls National School have done as part of who successfully implement the program. Organic Bins their recycling programme for Christmas term 2002. There are organic bins in the staff room and the home The original committee consists of: economics room. These bins are for suitable kitchen It’s all part of ‘RECYCLED RHYTHMS’ a truly Stephen Dunphy Eoghan Crabbe waste and are emptied into our compost bins. imaginative programme spawned and funded by Dublin Gerard Byrne Emma Hughes The Green-Schools Project was officially launched in City Council under the implementation of their Waste Anthony Grey David Spain March 2002. The launch day was combined with a CSPE Management Plan to encourage primary school children to recycle more waste. Claire Smyth Tony McDonnell project. The project was a fund raising effort for UNICEF and students paid to wear their ‘civies’ for the day. The project has already visited two other schools in the Darryl Stone Niall Cunningham Numerous posters and reminders were put up around the Thomas O’Dwyer Sean Cummins school. We also did a newsletter outlining our plans and Dublin 4 region during the Spring and Summer terms of the last academic year where the hit song ‘RECYCLED Stephen Coleman Emma Mitchell this was distributed to every student and staff member. REGGAE’ made ‘TOP OF THE TRASH HEAP’ as finale to each of the shows concerned. Some of these members have stepped down but they have been replaced by new members from our incoming first years

Dean Connolly Lee Grant For inspection purposes only. Jason Murphy Jenny Hunt Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Christmas Tree

Philip Croke Stephanie Mitchell Liam Brabazon John Cullen Recycling Lisa O’Neill Craig Gibney Kim Flood Success! Dublin City Council are providing a We have had considerable success in reducing our paper waste. We have reduced the amount of our weekly black Christmas Tree Chipping Service available bag waste by over half and we consistently fill 9-10 green from the 4th – 17th of January 2003 wheelie bins each month. However, we have encountered some difficulties. Some of the staff members and students inclusive between 10am and 4pm daily have not developed the habit of sorting their waste into correct bins. Initially we had a problem of getting at the Recycling Centre on The first thing the committee did was a survey of all the classroom green-bins emptied but this was solved by bins in the school to find out what and how much waste putting larger bins in some classes and students organised Londonbridge Road. is currently being produced by the school. They selected themselves to check the rooms on a regular basis. We also six large plastic bags from: held another promotion day in October 2002 to The trees will be chipped by mechanical remind everybody again. We envisage that will be an Assembly area Science Room on-going event. means and used as a mulch in the city Metal work rooms Art Room The Green-Schools Committee will continue to work parks and open spaces. The recycling of P.E. Area First and second Floor towards creating an ethos in Ringsend Technical Institute these trees in this way will reduce the These were the results: whereby REDUCE, RECYCLING and REUSING is an accepted way of life. quantity of waste going into landfill Paper 54% Bottles 13.3% We also hope to extend the project by developing our own while providing a re-usable resource. Plastic 17.5% Organic 10.6% composting material for use in school gardens on which Cans / Tins 5.5% Others 2.5% work has already begun.

IBEC (Irish Business and Employers Confederation) has just DID YOU KNOW? launched a paper in favour of including thermal treatment in integrated waste management.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

CIG launch Legal Team Report to Community

Report As part of their commitment to help the CIG assess all the decisions taken to provide a thermal treatment plant for Dublin, Dublin City Council supported the CIG in selecting and The launch of the CIG Report by Lord Mayor, briefing a legal team. The brief given to the legal team is detailed below. Over a period of Dermot Lacey on the 19th November, 2002 in almost five months, the independent legal team reviewed every decision taken and all of the City Hall brought to a close the CIG process. supporting documentation – including all of the reports, plans, minutes of meetings, agendas, Upon the release of the CIG report Mr Matt Twomey, motions and reports to Council, legislation (National and European) relevant to the decisions Assistant City Manager, confirmed that Dublin City taken on Thermal Treatment. Council are committed to ensuring full public involvement in the proposed thermal treatment plant at The following is the Executive Summary, but if you would like to read the full report please Poolbeg and he thanked the members of the Community Interest Group (CIG) for reporting back to the contact us at the Ringsend Regional Office – 2815918. community. The CIG, set up by Dublin City Council a year and a half ago, consisted of community volunteers Brief and Executive summary of Lavelle Coleman Report who were given the opportunity to directly influence the project as it develops, to learn more about the proposal 1. Dublin City Council authorised the Community 4. The following points were found to be of serious to site a thermal treatment plant on the Poolbeg peninsula Interest Group to instruct Solicitors and Counsel concern, which may involve illegality on the part of and to raise questions, issues and concerns that people in to advise them in relation to the siting of a proposed Dublin City Council: the community have about the proposed project. Incinerator / Thermal Treatment Plant at Poolbeg in Members attended a series of meetings addressed by (i) The Dublin Waste Management Plan may not Dublin. Dublin City Council is underwriting these leading Irish and international experts in a variety of fully comply with Section 22(7) of the Waste legal fees. environmental and legal fields. The Dublin Waste Plan Management Act 1996 by reason of its possible includes thermal treatment as part of an integrated failure to provide information of or have regard approach to waste management, which will see 2. The brief to advise on the compatibility of the decision to matters relevant to the selection of sites in 60% recycling, 25% thermal treatment and just 15% to site a thermal treatment plant at Poolbeg in Dublin landfill within the next twelve years. and associated decisions with relevant provisions of respect of waste facilities, plant or equipment; Irish and European Community law in particular to (ii) Despite representations that no decision has been All the information learned over the eighteen month consider the following questions: process of the CIG is available on made in relation to the siting of the plant at www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie. Dublin City Council's (a) In complying with requests to write a report to Poolbeg, it is our view that a conditional decision, Regional Office at Cambridge Road, Ringsend is open feed into the scoping document, are the CIG (but a decision nonetheless) has been made; Monday to Friday, 8am to 5.30pm, late night Tuesday members assisting in the procurement of a (iii) There appears not to be in existence a written until 8pm and callers are welcome. thermal treatment plant in Poolbeg or Order signed and dated by the City Manager “We are very appreciative of the huge input members of compromising any objection they may have regarding the decision on siting, such an Order the Community Interest Group made to this innovative to such? being arguably required in the exercise of an process of involving people, from the start, in decisions (b) What authority does the City Manager have executive function of such importance; that will affect their community” says Matt Twomey. “The CIG Report makes it clear that the process was very to procure a thermal treatment plant in Dublin? (iv) It appears that the City Manager may simply intensive and at times, highly technical. It demanded huge Within the remit of the waste plan, does he have have ‘rubber stamped’ the consultant’s decision time investment by all taking part and there is a huge an option of not procuring a thermal in relation to the choice of Poolbeg and that no body of knowledge now available to anyone interested in treatment plant? independent consideration of the consultant’s it. This was the first time that Dublin City Council set report and decision in relation to the choice of up a Community Interest Group and it did so a full two (c) Were all proper studies and procedures carried site was made. The Manager may therefore have years before the required statutory consultation on the out to select the preferred site considering that project begins in 2004. We knew that people had the City Manager stated that variations of the unlawfully delegated his powers to the consultants. For inspection purposes only. concerns about thermal treatment and we wanted to DevelopmentConsent of copyright Plan ownercould required be carried for any outother ifuse. 5. Concerns were raised by members of the CIG about provide a forum that would answer as many questions necessary? the effect of their participation in preparing any report, as can be answered at this early stage of the project. While the CIG chose not to highlight in their report, 3. The following conclusions were arrived at: known as a ‘scoping’ report, insofar as future legal specific issues to be addressed in moving forward, the proceedings may be concerned. It is clear that the (i) That the Waste Management Plan adopted by process has ensured that issues of concern to the local majority of members are of the view that their community were highlighted and Dublin City Council Dublin City Council in December 1998 includes a participation is being treated, or may be represented, will ensure they are addressed when the impact of the decision to construct a Thermal Treatment Plant; by Dublin City Council as public consultation on the plant is assessed at a later stage in the project.” (ii) That the Manager is obliged to implement the siting process. The majority view of the CIG members All of the experts who spoke to the CIG praised members objectives of the Waste Management Plan; is that there has not been proper consultation where and when it counted i.e. prior to choosing Poolbeg as for being part of such a unique and valuable process and (iii) That the City Manager has the authority and many of them, including Dr Paul Johnston of Greenpeace the preferred site. It is suggested that if and when the indeed is obliged to procure a Thermal Treatment offered the CIG detailed submissions for inclusion CIG provide a report, they should indicate that their Plant in view of the terms of the Waste in scoping. input into the scoping process is entirely without Management Plan; prejudice to either the Group’s right (or the right of (iv) That members may not vote to direct the Manager any individual members of the Group) to bring a not to continue the procurement process. challenge to the process to date and that their It was highlighted that members may vary or replace involvement should not be construed as an approval the plan without the consent of the Manager from of any of the processes to date but rather of their December 2002. involvement in the process to obtain further information from the developer in the Environmental Impact Statement about the proposed project.

Niamh Hyland, Barrister-at-Law and Lavelle Coleman, Solicitors 10th October 2002 We all use too much packaging but Londonbridge Road Editor’s Note: The City Council is firmly of the view that the Waste Plan complies in all respects with legislation. cannot get enough. Bring your recyclables to us The making of the Compulsory Purchase Order concerning the site deals with all the site issues raised above.

Dublin City Council would like to thank members of the CIG and the observers of the process involved in putting the report together for all of their hard work and commitment.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03 Londonbridge Road Bring Centre

Almost all of the waste that your green-bin can not take, your local bring centre will. The Old Pumping Station, Londonbridge Road will take Glass, Plastic, Food Waste, Garden Waste, Textiles, Household hazardous waste, paper, card, tins and cans!!! It is open Mon-Thur 8.00am-4.00pm, Fridays 10.00am-1.00pm and Saturday and Sunday 10.00am-4.00pm. Phone John www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie at 6683942 for more details. Website

The Dublin Waste to Energy Project has launched a new website. It contains information about the project including Dublin's Waste Management Plan, explanations of different types of thermal treatment, details about public involvement and lots more. The address is www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie, so check it out and email us with your comments or questions.

Remember, if you don't have access to the Internet and would like to look at the site, there is free public internet access for the purpose of researching waste issues in the Ringsend Regional Office from 9am-5pm daily.

For inspection purposes only. This Christmas GoConsent M.A.D. of copyright owner required for any(Make other use. A Difference)

Make sure your cards and stationery Buy good quality decorations which Buy well made durable toys and gifts are made from recycled paper will last year after year Send any toys that are no longer Bring your own carrier bags when If possible buy a potted Christmas needed to a local children’s charity you go shopping – even when you tree and use it year after year Purchase a compost bin for a loved are not grocery shopping Bring all of your empty bottles and one as a Christmas present Reuse wrapping paper cans to local bring banks Make a New Year’s resolution: Instead of wrapping paper use Leave your old Christmas tree to be Anything that is recyclable in my reusable gift bags shredded and composted house WILL be recycled

How did you go MAD (Make a Difference) this Christmas?

Do you have an unusual waste reducing or recycling tip that you would like to share with our readers. If so please send it to the Ringsend Regional Office by January the 31st. The best three tips will receive a recycling related prize!!

If you would like more information about any aspect of the Dublin Waste to Energy Project, why not contact Elizabeth Arnett, Local Communications Co-Ordinator at the Dublin City Council, Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4. Ph 2815918

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

VOLUME 2 / ISSUE 1 / FEBRUARY 2003 Don’t miss it! Ringsend Waste Awareness Day Recycled Rhythms Going from Strength to Strength

Saturday 22nd of February 12.00 pm – 5.00pm Ringsend Technical Institute, Cambridge Road, Ringsend. Dublin City Council invites you to attend • Professor Dr. Dieter Schrenk, Consultant to the “Recycled Rhythms” Dublin City Council’s World Health Organisation and the German Federal project that helps primary school children the Dublin Waste Plan Awareness Day on Environmental Agency (EPA). Doctor of Medicine and turn waste into music is really going strong. Saturday 22nd February 2003 from 12 noon Professor of Food Chemistry and Environmental The pupils of St Patrick’s Girls National School Toxicology at the University of Kaiserslauten, Germany. until 5pm in Ringsend Technical Institute, finished the term with a bang (literally) when • Gunnar Kjaer, a Danish waste management consultant they had two concerts. Ringsend, Dublin 4. who was most recently Project Director at Denmark’s The pupils played international, traditional and Officials from the four Dublin local authorities will be largest waste treatment company, located in on hand to offer advice and answer questions about all Copenhagen and owned by 14 local authorities. Christmas music on their instruments and their aspects of the Dublin Waste Plan, including recycling, Other activities on the day will include a Puppeteer to singing brought the house down. The girls were composting, landfill and waste to energy. National and entertain children and teach them how to make puppets also interviewed for national radio and starred international experts will include: from recycled materials and cookery demonstrations by on Morning Ireland before Christmas! students from the National College of Catering, • Henrick van der Kamp, Head of DIT Bolton Street’s This term it is the turn of St Patrick’s Boys Cathal Brugha Street, For inspection who will purposes make only. tempting snacks Planning and Development Department. from leftoverConsent foods. of copyright owner required for any other use. National School, so look out for an invitation

• Dr. Paul Johnston, Toxicologist and Principal Scientist to their concert soon. For more information visit www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie at the Greenpeace International Research Laboratory in the University of Exeter. Author of “Incineration and Human Health”. Christmas Tree The Dublin Waste to Energy Project Recycling The Dublin Waste Management Plan sets the following of a thermal treatment plant. In November 2000, a siting A Great Success objectives for dealing with waste in the Dublin Region: study was carried out which identified the preferred site for the development of a thermal treatment plant for Dublin City Council provided a Christmas 59% Recycling; Dublin as being on the Poolbeg Peninsula. Tree Chipping Service from the 4th - 17th 25% Thermal Treatment; In January 2001, Dublin City Council appointed January 2003 at the Recycling Centre on 16% Landfill. consultants who would select, on their behalf, a service Londonbridge Road. The service was availed provider to design, build, operate and finance the plant. of by more people than ever before, keen to The plan, which is fully compliant with EU and National This service provider will be in place by early 2004 and Policy and Legislation, places the emphasis on recycling will undertake the statutory process. This means that reduce and recycle waste. before the service provider can build a plant they must of waste over all other management options. The trees have been chipped by mechanical However, realistically we can not recycle everything – obtain three things; means and will be used as mulch in the city there will always be residual waste. Rather than landfill 1) Planning approval from An Bord Pleannala all of this residue, Dublin City Council has opted to parks and open spaces. Recycling these trees in recover energy from part of it and landfill the remainder. 2) Licences from the Environmental Protection Agency this way reduces the quantities of waste going This will mean that the waste that can be recycled will 3) Licences from the Commission for Energy Regulation. to landfill while be recycled, the waste that cannot be recycled but has a calorific value will be converted to energy and the If you would like further information about any aspect providing a remainder will be landfilled. of the Dublin Waste to Energy Project – please contact us re-usable at the Ringsend Regional Office (Ph 01 2815918). Implementation of the Plan is ongoing with respect to resource. all of the objectives in the plan, including the provision

INSIDE: Baseline environmental monitoring to commence taking into account issues raised by experts during CIG process.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

Dublin Waste to Energy Project Frequently Asked Questions

Why does Dublin City need a Council was providing in this regard. In order to thermal treatment plant? determine once and for all if Dublin City Council had acted correctly, the CIG were permitted to select and brief The Waste Management Plan adopted by Dublin City their own legal team. This team spent almost 5 months Council in 1998, sets the objectives of 59% recycling; going through all of the relevant legislation, reports, 25% thermal treatment and 16% landfill. The recycling minutes of meetings, agendas etc and eventually issued target is extremely ambitious and Dublin City Council Dublin’s Waste Plan their report. Dublin City Council is delighted with the is determined to pursue and achieve it. However, we can conclusions of the report and it is available to every not recycle everything. Sometimes products contain a member of the community. mixture of a number of different types of waste and can Have plants in Europe closed down? (Contact Ringsend Regional Office 01 2815918). not be recycled. Sometimes people do not use the correct Yes. The EU adopted the first major piece of legislation bin and waste becomes mixed and can not be recycled. controlling emissions from Municipal Waste Incineration This is the type of waste that we refer to as “residue”. Did the CIG process answer all of the in 1989. Incinerators in Europe had to comply with this National and EU Policy is forcing us to rethink our questions raised by the community? Directive by 1996. Many old facilities across Europe dependency on landfill, so what do we do with this No. It couldn’t. Some questions can only be addressed had to be closed, as they could not meet the strict residue? – it can not be left on the doorstep! Dublin City after a developer is appointed at the end of 2003 and environmental controls laid out in the legislation nor was Council is proposing to build a thermal treatment plant when the Environmental Impact Statement is being it economically viable for them to retrofit modern flue gas to deal with combustible waste that cannot be recycled. compiled in 2004. cleaning technology. Another Directive was adopted by This will mean that 25% of Dublin’s waste will be turned the EU in 2000 which sets even higher standards and all into heat and energy. What size plant is Dublin City modern facilities built today have the technology to ensure that emission levels comply with the strict controls. proposing to develop? What was the Community Interest Group Process? Dublin City Council is proposing to develop a plant with Is food grown within a 30km radius of the capacity of approximately 400,000 – 500,000 tonnes a thermal treatment plant no longer The CIG process was established by Dublin City Council per annum. This will deal with the 25% of Dublin’s waste described as organic? in the Summer of 2001 to provide a formal means for the that can not be recycled and should not be landfilled. community to highlight their concerns about the Dublin No. The EU has outlined the standards for Waste to Energy Project in advance of the statutory Were the visiting experts truly organic farming in the Organic Farming Regulation consultation phase. independent? (EU 2092 91). These regulations clearly state what criteria need to be complied with before a farm can be certified How were members of the CIG selected? Yes. The Community Interest Group members selected all as organic and do not make any reference to thermal but two of the experts. Incidentally, some of the expert treatment plants. It is neither scientifically logical nor Members of the Community Interest Group were selected speakers insisted on not being paid a fee, to emphasise agronomically sound to impose a 30 km radius limit on by an Independent Selection Committee made up of a their independence. farms in the vicinity of thermal treatment plants as the local Primary School Principal, a Local Community levels of pollutants emitted from such plants are extremely Garda and a Marine Biologist from Trinity College with One of the experts that were not chosen by the CIG low compared to other sources i.e. domestic fires. a research interest in Dublin Bay. An application form themselves, was invited back to a second meeting was issued to every home in the area and all local residents by the members of the group. and interest groups were invited to apply. When all of the Why have no plans been put forward for For inspection purposes only. applications were received, the Selection Committee Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. the disposal of fly ash and bottom ash? Is it a foregone conclusion that a thermal reviewed each application and put together a group that treatment plant will be sited on the Issues dealing with? could reflect the views of the community and at the same Poolbeg Peninsula? All plans to deal with the disposal of ash from the time could effectively engage in the process. proposed waste to energy facility can not be outlined until Dublin City Council has identified the preferred site for the Environmental Impact Statement is undertaken in the development of a thermal treatment on the Poolbeg Is the completion of the CIG the end of 2004. This document will answer all of the questions Peninsula. However, nothing can happen on the site until Dublin City Council’s consultation? raised by the Community Interest Group in relation to planning approval has been granted by An Bord Pleannala; the impacts that a plant of this nature may or may not No. On the contrary, the CIG process was the start. a licence issued by the Environmental Protection Agency have on the area. The CIG process ended in November 2002, and Dublin and permission to generate electricity attained from the City Council will continue to provide up to date accurate Commission for Energy Regulation. Each of these will information through the Ringsend Regional Office and have its own statutory process where the community can other Public Consultation processes between now and the engage by making observations and or objections. end of the project. FAQ Why is it called waste-to-energy and Why did Dublin City Council agree to not incineration? Do you have a question about Dublin City allow the CIG to appoint and brief their Until a developer has been appointed at the end of 2003, Council’s Waste management Plan or own legal team? the technology will not be decided. What we can say about the Dublin Waste to Energy Part of the terms of reference of the CIG was to ‘assess the at this stage for certain is that there will be a 400,000 – work that has been carried out by Dublin City Council to 500,000 tonnes per annum plant that will turn waste into Project? If so, why not send it into us determine the need for such a facility and the action that heat and electricity. While incineration is one form and we will do our best to answer it has been taken to identify an appropriate site for such a of waste-to-energy plant, not all waste-to-energy plants are and publish it on our website. facility’. It became clear during the CIG processes that incinerators. So for the time being the most accurate the CIG were not satisfied with the answers Dublin City phrase is “waste to energy”. www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie

DID YOU KNOW? You can now recycle milk and juice and cartons at the Civic Amenity Centre, Londonbridge Road.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

Good News from Environmental Protection Agency Dioxin Emissions Set to Fall

The Environmental Protection Agency recently released Seventeen of the two hundred and ten dioxins and furan combustion chamber. Cleaning of flue gases is now a a report that estimates dioxin emissions to the Irish compounds have been identified as presenting a risk to highly efficient process that removes almost everything environment during 2000 and 2010. The good news is human health if exposure is above a certain dosage. from the flue gas before it is emitted into the atmosphere. that the dioxins levels in Ireland remain one of the lowest The World Health Organisation has defined a safe daily This is why the impact to air quality from incinerators in Europe. The single biggest source of dioxins released intake level and since the dioxin levels in the Irish compared to illegal burning is so different. Illegal burning to air, is and will continue to be, uncontrolled burning of environment are so low, we will remain well below the of waste means that dioxins are produced and released domestic waste. Even if all seven municipal waste safe intake level. This is a status that we must maintain. into the environment. Treating waste in a proper facility incinerators are constructed and are operational by the Dioxin levels in Irish dairy products are some of the means that dioxin production is limited, and what dioxins year 2010 they will contribute less than 2% of the overall lowest in the world. In fact reports (EPA 2000) indicate are produced are captured and landfilled under controlled dioxin emissions to air! Almost 85% will come from the that dioxin levels are coming down. This is despite the conditions at licensed facilities, limiting any potential illegal burning of 60,000 tonnes of municipal waste. fact that there are currently nine small-scale waste release of dioxins to the environment. incinerators already operating here in Ireland without Dioxins are an unwanted by-product of low temperature any impact on the environment or food quality. In conclusion, dioxin levels in Ireland are still relatively burning of materials containing chlorine. Chlorine can low. However we must recognise that poor waste be found in almost everything we throw in the bin. The Environmental Protection Agency report also looks management resulting in the illegal burning of waste The bonfires we enjoy so much on Halloween night are a at dioxin emissions to land and water. Munical Waste is a problem that will only get worse if we do not face common example of low temperature burning of chlorine. Incinerators produce a hazardous fly ash that needs to be up to the reality of the issue. All of the necessary Even if all seven municipal waste incinerators are in place landfilled in a special facility. Fly ash is basically the result information to manage waste has been identified in the in 2010, bonfires will produce twice as much dioxins. of cleaning the gases (flue gas) that come from the Regional Waste Management Plans.

Some Salient findings of the EPA Dioxin Inventory Report

Incinerator ash would be disposed of to licensed General Incineration landfill facilities under controlled conditions, which Total estimates emissions in 2000 were 93 grams, Year 2000 could include immobilisation of the waste, thereby of which over 70% came from uncontrolled combustion limiting any potential release to the environment. processes (especially domestic waste burning, vehicle Emission from nine existing hazardous waste incinerators In the report, in accordance with the relevant UNEP and house fires and bonfires). (0.0068 grams) amounted to 0.015% of total emissions to methodology, the deposit of this ash in landfill is Total estimated emissions to air in 2000 were 34 grams, air in 2000. described as an “an emission to land”. and are projected to fall to 30 grams by 2010. By comparison, estimated emissions from – However, because modern landfills are sealed, this does not mean that the dioxin content of the ash would be Total estimated emissions to water in 2000 were about • Burning of domestic waste (17.9 grams) entering the environment. 2.2 grams, and are projected to fall to 0.3 grams in 2010. were over 2600 times higher. 2. This estimate does not take into account advances in Total estimated emissions to land in 2000 were about • Accidental house fires (5.1 grams) technology to 2010. It is based on the new EU flue 57 grams, and are projected to rise to 79 grams in 2010, were 750 times higher. 3 principally reflecting dioxin inputs from sewage sludge gas emission limit value of 0.1 ng/m (9 nanogram per • Domestic heating and cooking (2.25 grams) cubic metre) for dioxins – that is one ten thousand spread in land (17%), and incinerator ash to be landfilled were over 300 times higher. in licensed facilities (23%). millionth of a gram per cubic metre of gas emitted. • Halloween bonfires (0.9 grams) Existing technologies are already capable of achieving were over 130 times higher. between one fifth and one tenth of that limit value. Uncontrolled sources of dioxins are significant • Transport (0.97 For grams) inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Taking account also of hazardous waste incineration, 2010 : 60,000 tonnes burned illegally = 18g were over 140 times higher. 1,000,000 tonnes burned in seven incinerators total dioxin emissions to air would amount to 0.55 grams, = 0.54g of dioxins per annum Year 2010 or 1.8% of total projected emission to air. Assuming thermal treatment of 1 million tonnes of By comparison, it is projected that emissions from – 100 municipal waste in 2010, estimated dioxin emissions to • Burning of domestic waste (17.9 grams) air would amount to 0.5 grams, or 1.65% of total could be over 30 times higher. % Contribution of projected emission to air. 80 dioxins to air in 2010 • Accidental house fires (5.1 grams) could be 9 times higher. 60 1. This estimate assumes incineration of 1 million tonnes of municipal waste and up to 100,000 tonnes • Domestic heating and cooking (1.34 grams) 40 of hazardous waste. could be nearly twice as high. • Halloween bonfires (0.9 grams) 20 could be nearly twice as high. centage Contribution to air (2010) 0 Per Incineration Other Sources 20 18 25 16 Predicted Sources of dioxin 14 Predicted sources of 20 emissions to air in 2010 uncontrolled dioxin 12 emissions to air in 2010 15 10 8 10 6

5 4 2 Air Emissions gTEQ/a) Air Emissions gTEQ/a) 0 0 Incineration Metal Power Mineral Transport Uncontrolled Open Burning Farm Domestic Bonfires Accidental Accidental Production Generation Products of Construction Plastics Burning of Building Vehicle Fires Wood Waste Fires

Dioxin emission to air in Ireland are set to fall by 2010 - even if all seven municipal waste incinerators are built. (EPA, 2002)

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

Recycled Christmas Decorations Baseline Study

Christmas 2002 was the first year that the Ringsend Regional Office had a to go ahead Christmas Decoration Competition. Judging by the number and standard of The Community Interest Group Process, which was entries, it is going to become a very popular annual event. undertaken between August 2001 and November 2002 identified many concerns commonly held throughout the communities of Ringsend, Irishtown and Sandymount about the proposal to site a thermal treatment plant on the Poolbeg Peninsula (see Waste Wise Volume 1, Issues 1,2 3 and 4 for details). A variety of concerns were raised by members of the group, observers of the process and by the many national and international experts whom the group selected to address their meetings.

One of the main issues raised time and time again throughout the CIG process was the current lack of detailed information on some aspects of the environment in Poolbeg and the fact that baseline environmental monitoring is not routinely carried out in the area. Detailed information on parameters such as Air Quality, that require monitoring to be carried out over a long “So much additional waste gets put in the bin this time of “We would like to thank the pupils and their teachers for period of time, will be necessary if the true impact of a year that we decided to combine our need for Christmas doing such a wonderful job and we look forward to next thermal treatment plant on the environment can properly decorations with our efforts to get everybody Reducing, year when we will expand the competition to all schools be assessed. Some experts suggested that baseline Reusing and Recycling their waste” says Elizabeth Arnett, in the area”. monitoring of these parameters be undertaken by Dublin Local Communications Co-Ordinator. City Council as soon as possible.

“We decided to ask our neighbours, the 1st class pupils Dublin City Council has considered very carefully the from St Patrick’s Boys and St Patrick’s Girls National information presented at CIG meetings and are planning Schools to come to our rescue. The task was to make to begin a Programme of Baseline Environmental decorations out of rubbish in the bin and we were not Monitoring taking into account concerns raised by experts disappointed with the fabulous results. The pupils made snow men from recycled newspapers and scrap fabric; during the process. This will involve establishing Christmas cards out of every conceivable bit of waste; Air Quality Monitoring in the area, installing a number wall hangings from used yoghurt cartons and cotton wool; of meteorological stations and many other initiatives. loop chains from toilet roll inserts and old magazines – to name but a few of the creations that adorned our If you would like to know more, why not come office this festive period. along to our Waste Information Day on 22nd of “To celebrate their success, we invited the best recycling February in Ringsend Technical Institute or call artists to a party in our newly decorated office where the into the Ringsend Regional Office at any time! prizewinners had plenty of chocolate and Christmas cheer as reward for their efforts. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Questionnaire

Thank you to all who responded to the questionnaire in the November edition of Should I recycle Kitchen Waste? Waste Wise. Some very surprising revelations came out of your replies. For example, We recently ran a feature on home composting of kitchen and garden waste but judging from the replies we have most people did not know that Dublin City Council has a target of 60% recycling!!! received, very few people are composting organic We have attempted to address some of the issues highlighted in your responses. household waste. Home composting is simple, efficient and very inexpensive. It converts kitchen and garden waste into a valuable resource that can be used in the Where is my nearest Bring Centre? What is the waste hierarchy? garden. When organic waste is not composted but is There are three places in Ringsend, Irishtown and The waste hierarchy is the basic mixed with other waste-streams, it causes a lot of Sandymount where you can bring your recyclables. guiding principle that prioritises problems. It can reduce the potential for other waste management options on materials to be recycled, it reduces the calorific value of The Bring Centres at Sandymount Strand and the basis of their waste and when disposed of in landfill creates methane Landsdowne take all coloured glass, beverage cans (a greenhouse gas). and clothes. environmental impact. If you would like to begin composting, The Civic Amenity Centre Londonbridge Road is on Our top priority is to your doorstep and is one of the best facilities in the city. minimise the amount contact (01) 6722301 to order your compost bin at the 2 It takes all coloured glass, clothes, car and household of waste we produce reduced rate of 25 batteries, mobile phones, phone batteries and chargers, and reuse and You can even get the bin delivered to your door. plastic bags and plastic bottles, all paper waste, recycle as much Phone (01) 8369225 and quote payment receipt number. green garden waste, food and beverage cans. as possible.

If you would like more information about any aspect of the Dublin Waste to Energy Project, why not contact Elizabeth Arnett, Local Communications Co-Ordinator at the Dublin City Council, Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4. Ph 2815918 Fax 6606921 Web www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

VOLUME 2 / ISSUE 2 / SEPTEMBER 2003 You are invited... What’s Inside? Do you want to know more about how the environmental impact of • Community Invited to Meetings the proposed Dublin Waste to Energy Project will be assessed? • Review of Waste Plan confirms integrated approach is best Dublin City Council is hosting a series of Information Sessions to provide • Developers shortlisted information to the community on Air Quality, Traffic, Ecology, Health etc. • Food Quality and Incinerators At each meeting information will be provided on:

• Developments on the Dublin Waste to Energy Project; • Progress on Baseline Monitoring (different topic each time); Food Safety Authority • Statutory Processes relevant to the project. of Ireland Discussion THE FIRST MEETING, FOCUSING ON AIR QUALITY WILL BE HELD IN THE MOUNT paper: HERBERT HOTEL, HERBERT ROAD, LANSDOWNE ROAD, DUBLIN 4 ON WEDNESDAY 24TH OF SEPTEMBER AT 7.30 PM. Waste Incineration and possible

Experts will be on hand to answer questions on: contamination of the food • How air quality is monitored in Dublin? supply with dioxins Dublin City Council welcomes the recent • What baseline air quality monitoring is currently being undertaken in the Ringsend, publication issued by the Food Safety Authority Irishtown, Sandymount areas? “Waste incineration and possible contamination • What impact would a thermal treatment plant have on Air Quality in the area? of the food supply with dioxins”. • How is that impact assessed? This discussion paper, which is available on the Food Safety Authority website (www.fsai.ie) We feel that it is essential to provide an open forum where members ofFor theinspection community purposes only. can ask Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. verifies that when properly managed waste questions of Dublin City Council, members of the project team and relevant experts about the project incinerators are introduced in Ireland they and how it may impact Dublin. will not impact food safety.

See inside for more information The FSAI considers that incineration facilities, if properly managed, will not contribute to dioxin levels in the food supply to any significant extent and will not affect food quality or safety. As part of an overall waste management strategy, Stamp of Approval for as reflected in the EC Waste Hierarchy, incineration coupled with waste prevention, reduction, recycling and other treatment Dublin City Council Plan methods is the preferred option. In order to maximise consumer protection, it is vital that rigorous monitoring programmes be maintained What did the review conclude? and that consideration be given to expanding environmental monitoring around any established The review of the Dublin Waste Management Plan confirmed that the basic principles outlined in the plan are incineration facilities. The FSAI will endeavour to sound i.e. prioritise waste minimisation, recycle as much as possible, thermally treat some of the residue ensure that such programmes and landfill as little as possible. are put in place.

In 1998, Dublin City Council adopted its Waste Management Plan 1999 – 2003. The targets of the Dublin Regional Waste Management Plan are 59% recycling, 25% thermal treatment and 16% landfill. This year the City Council engaged Mazars Consulting to assist in a non-statutory review of progress made in implementing the plan. Part of the Terms of Reference for the review were as follows: • To review actual performance to date against the targets set out in the 1998 Waste Management Plan. • To propose Waste Management Targets for the period 2004 – 2006

Continued on page 4

As part of our continuing programmes of NEWS: educating children about waste minimisation and recycling, Dublin City Council is funding a local puppeteer to work in schools.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

Time Line – What is happening now?

Dublin Waste to Energy Plant Shortlist Announced

In April Dublin City Council announced that four • Sotec GmbH, a German company with close to 30 Once bids are received from the four service providers, leading European consortia have been shortlisted to bid years experience in building and operating waste to it is likely that two of them will be asked to make a best for the design, build, operation and financing of the energy plants in Germany and Madeira and final offer. When the successful service provider is For inspection purposes only. proposed waste to energy plant at Poolbeg. The next stage • TIRU SA,Consent one of of copyright the largest owner requiredFrench for waste any other to use.energy appointed they must commence with the statutory of the process is to obtain detailed bids from each of the plant operators with plants in Paris and other cities processes which will mean seeking: four, outlining their proposals for providing a plant throughout France, and in North America. They have over 80 years waste treatment experience and are • Certification from An Bord Pleanála for the capable of treating 400,000 – 500,000 tonnes currently building new facilities in Paris and Perpignan. Environmental Impact Statement approximately of non-recyclable waste from Dublin • Licences to operate from the Environmental annually. This will take until the end of the year, at which “Over the last six months we have carried out a Protection Agency time Dublin City Council may invite a ‘Best and Final comprehensive comparative evaluation with the assistance of • Permission to generate and supply electricity from the Offer’ from two bidders to enable selection of the better technical, financial and legal experts, of the ability, track Commission for Energy Regulation. consortium to provide the service, including obtaining the record and resources of the thirteen consortia,” says Matt necessary statutory approvals. Twomey, Assistant City Manager. “The shortlisted consortia Only when all of these processes have been completed showed they have significantly more experience in operating successfully can construction begin on the proposed site Thirteen international consortia expressed interest in the waste to energy plants of the size required by Dublin than at Poolbeg. project and the four shortlisted consortia are by far the the other nine, all of whom are top class firms. We are Over the next year, before a developer is appointed two most experienced waste to energy plant operators in satisfied that we have selected the top four consortia capable things will be happening: Europe with plants in London, Paris, Copenhagen and of meeting the requirements of the Dublin Region Waste • Baseline Monitoring will be carried out Birmingham, among other cities. All four are currently Management Plan.” building new waste to energy plants in Europe. The short • Information Sessions will be held. listed consortia are: The Dublin Region Waste Management Plan aims to Baseline monitoring will be carried out over the next • Elsam Ireland Ltd., the Irish subsidiary of the largest achieve 59% recycling (currently 20% and rising) with year or so and will measure parameters like air quality to Danish electric power utility with over 30 years 25% of the waste being thermally treated and the provide environmental data that will be needed to assess combined experience in operating 9 incinerators remaining 16% going to landfill. the impact of any facility on the environment. throughout Denmark in addition to energy projects in UK, Italy, Poland and elsewhere. They are currently The announcement of the shortlist of developers is a Baseline monitoring and other issues of interest to the constructing a number of facilities in Denmark. step forward for the Dublin Waste to Energy Project. community will be discussed at information sessions to be • Onyx Aurora Ltd., a UK based subsidiary of a French The shortlisted developers will now be asked to put facilitated by Dublin City Council over the next year. group operating over 100 plants worldwide including together a detailed proposal and bid to design, build, plants in London, Birmingham, France, the United operate and finance the proposed waste to energy plant. States and the Far East. They are currently building three new facilities in the UK, and have at least 20 years experience of operating municipal incinerators.

DID YOU KNOW? New State of the art Bring Centre to open soon in Ringsend.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

Information Sessions As part of our continuing programme of awareness raising Topics that we would propose to cover during the information that will enable the community to better activities for the Dublin Waste to Energy Project a series information sessions include Air Quality, Ecology, Traffic, understand and partake in the various elements of the of Information Sessions are being held the objective of Health, Climate, Noise and Vibration. statutory processes. which is to enable full community participation in the 4. Question and Answer Session statutory processes. “We feel that it is essential to provide an open forum where members of the community can ask questions of This will be a very tightly controlled session whereby In 2004 Dublin City Council plans to appoint a Dublin City Council, members of the project team and members of the public will be given the opportunity to developer who will undertake to: relevant experts about the project and how it may impact ask questions of the project team and the experts the communities of Ringsend, Irishtown and present. The open floor time will be kept very strictly 1) Submit an Environmental Impact Statement Sandymount. It is essential that information be made to twenty minutes at which time the facilitator will for approval to An Bord Pleanála; available in an appropriate and relevant format,” move onto the next phase of the session. 2) Submit a licence application to the said Matt Twomey, Assistant City Manager. 5. Clinic Environmental Protection Agency; For inspection purposes only. For half an hour after the session officially ends, The first meetingConsent of will copyright be held owner in required the Mount for any other Herbert use. 3) Submit an application to the Commission members of the team and experts will be available to Hotel, Herbert Road, Lansdowne Road, Dublin 4 on for Energy Regulation. the community for one-to-one discussion. Wednesday 24th of September at 7.30 pm. Refreshments will be served. These processes provide an opportunity for any member The first issues to be discussed will be Air Quality and of the community to raise any issue, objection or concern The following Terms of Reference will apply experts will be on hand to answer questions on: they may have about the development of a thermal 1. Meetings will be held every two months and advertised treatment plant on the Penninsula. • How air quality is monitored in Dublin? widely throughout the community. Dublin City Council has been actively engaged in public • What baseline air quality monitoring is currently 2. Meetings will be open to the public. being undertaken in the Ringsend, Irishtown, consultation on the Dublin Waste to Energy Project since 3. All meetings will have independent facilitation Sandymount area? October 2000. Through the various initiatives i.e. provided by Dublin City Council. Community Interest Group Process, Waste Awareness • What impact would a thermal treatment plant have on Day, Ringsend Regional Office etc a large number of air quality in the area? 4. Comments / questions are welcome from the floor when the facilitator indicates it is appropriate to do so people have asked questions about the development. One • How is that impact assessed? issue that comes back to us time and time again relates to – this will ensure that all present have an opportunity to comment. the statutory process and what it will entail. The format of the meeting will be as follows 1. An introduction from the facilitator to set the scene 5. Notes will be taken at the meeting and will be made While a detailed proposal will not be available until a available to the wider public in a Newsletter format developer is appointed in Summer 2004, DCC is keen to for the session. The context within which the event is being held, what activities have already happened and that will be circulated to every home and business. ensure that the community has access to all of the Notes from the process will be in the form of a copy information needed to understand and participate in the what we hope the community will get out of attendance will be outlined. of the presentations made and questions and statutory processes. answers raised. 2. Update from Dublin City Council focusing on The Council will continue to provide information to the developments relevant to the Dublin Waste to Energy 6. Input from the community as to what sort of community over the next 12 months in advance of a Project and details on all other activities associated information should be made available is an essential developer being appointed and the commencement of the with the implementation of the Dublin Region Waste part of the process. All are welcome to make statutory processes. The first initiative which is the Management Plan. submissions to the Ringsend Regional Office. ‘Information Sessions’ will take the format of a series of open facilitated meetings where information will be 3 Expert speakers provided on the: The central themes of these information sessions are to provide the community with information on the • Developments on the Dublin Waste to Energy Project; statutory processes, baseline monitoring and how it is • Progress on Baseline Monitoring; relevant to environmental impact. Each session will • Statutory Processes relevant to the project. have a different theme and the speaker(s) will present

The FSAI considers that incineration facilities, if properly managed, will not contribute to dioxin levels in the food supply to any significant extent and will not affect food quality or safety.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03

Dublin City Council Reviews Waste Management Plan (cont’d)

Household Commercial Litter and Street Cleaning Bring Banks Green Waste Who Carried out the Review? (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) (tonnes) The review was carried out by a team of Total 176,286 25,000 25,000 8,000 20,000 independent consultants from Mazars Consulting and University College Dublin. The Members of the SPC Recycled 12,118 0 0 8,000 20,000 Sub-Group and the Officials of the City Council Landfill 164,168 25,000 25,000 N/A N/A engaged on the review were: Other N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cllr. Niamh Cosgrave – Chairperson Cllr. Ruairi McGinley Table 1: Volumes of waste managed by Dublin City Council in 2002 Dr. Bridin Brady Mr. Matt Twomey, Assistant City Manager 4. Performance to Date 5. 2006 Targets for Household Waste Mr. Tom Loftus, Head of Waste Management Services In respect of the Waste Management Plan, 1999 – 2003 The proposed targets to be achieved by 2006 are: Cllr. Claire Wheeler of the City Council, we find that • The growth in household waste should be limited from Cllr. Kevin Humphreys • The target of 1% growth in household waste over the 176,300 tonnes in 2002 to 190,817 tonnes by 2006. Mr. Damian Nolan period 1999-2003 has almost been achieved. The actual This takes account of a projected 0.5% annual growth Mr. Con Coll, Executive Manager rate of growth has been reduced from an historic 3.54% in the population of the City. Assuming no growth in to 1.47% per annum. waste arising from other sources such as the commercial Mr. John Singleton, Project Engineer sector or litter, this will mean that the City Council will • In an international context, the target of recycling manage 268,817 tonnes of waste in 2006. 59-60% of household waste by 2004 was very Dublin City Council has responsibility for the ambitious, because not only had no EU Member State • The City aims to recycle 35% (equal to 51,425 tonnes) management of waste and achievement of waste even approached this level of recycling, but also because of the potentially recyclable material in the household management targets in Dublin City. The Council has the recyclable portion of Dublin household waste is waste stream. The City should aim to divert a further responsibility for virtually all household waste and some 77% of the total. The actual recycling level achieved in 20,230 tonnes of biodegradable waste by 2006 under commercial waste, but it does not have direct 2002 is 20% of total household waste and reflect well the EU Landfill Directive. These targets should be responsibility for significant waste streams such as on both the City Council and the people of Dublin. accomplished by a combination of biological treatment construction/demolition waste or substantial amounts A major constraint for Dublin has been finding external and material recycling. (Assuming that current volumes of the industrial and commercial waste. (See Table 1) markets for its recycled materials and it is noteworthy for Bring Centres and Green Waste Facilities remain The targets of the Dublin Regional Waste Management that a 35.4% recycling rate has been achieved for those static, this will result in over 99,000 tonnes of waste Plan are 59% recycling, 25% thermal treatment and materials for which markets have been identified being diverted.) 16% landfill. and developed. • Should these targets be met, the City will achieve a To achieve these targets, the three fundamental changes • The management and regulatory environment 49% diversion rate for recyclable household materials. needed in the City to deal with these were: needed for the implementation of the Plan has been It will, however, still need to manage approximately put in place. 119,162 tonnes of household waste plus a little over The people of Dublin had to participate in the new 1. 50,000 tonnes of litter and commercial waste by waste management system. This meant that a range of • The built infrastructure on which the Plan depends, consignment to landfill in 2006. advice and education programmes had to be developed notably the biodegradable waste facility and the thermal and implemented. treatment plant, has not been developed as fast as To achieve these targets, the key tasks for the City planned, due primarily to the time needed to complete Council are: The necessary infrastructure had to be put in place, 2. the relevant planning processes. This has implications including recycling facilities, biodegradable waste 6. Effect of Achieving Targets for the City in that despite the successes achieved to treatment facilities, bring centres etc. The following chart shows that the national targets date, the City must still have disposal outlets for set in 1998 were very ambitious when compared to 3. Market outlets for recycled and recovered waste had probably in excess of 160,000 tonnes of waste after the For inspection purposes only. international practice. Dublin has made very good to be developed. planned Consentclosure of ofcopyright the landfill owner required facility for inany Arthurstown other use. progress to date and with the new infrastructure now in 2007. In addition, the Council also had to establish new by-laws being developed, substantial advances should be made and revise its internal structures. by the end of 2006. Achieving the targets proposed will mean that Dublin’s future diversion rates will compare very well with international levels. (See Figure 1)

Figure 1: Comparison of Dublin Waste Management Targets with international waste management data (late 1990’s)

Why is the review called non-statutory? The review of the Waste Management Plan undertaken by Dublin City Council is non-statutory because there is no requirement under law for the Council to undertake a review at this time. However, Dublin City Council felt it would be a beneficial exercise to assess the targets and progress in the Plan.

If you would like more information about any aspect of the Dublin Waste to Energy Project, why not contact Elizabeth Arnett, Local Communications Co-Ordinator at the Dublin City Council, Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4. Ph 01 2815918 Fax 01 6606921 Web www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03 Special Report

Special Report January 2004

YOU ARE INVITED…. What is the Dublin Waste to Energy Project? INFORMATIONS SESSION 3 - Dublin Waste to Energy Project: The Dublin Waste to Energy Project is Health Aspects Saturday 21st of February 12.00 - 4.30 providing a thermal treatment plant to deal with 25% of waste from the Dublin Region. INFORMATIONS SESSION 4 - Dublin Waste to Energy Project: This is in keeping with the objectives of the regional plan which also provides for waste Traffic Aspects Saturday 3rd of April 12.00 - 4.30 minimisation, 59% recycling and 16% landfill. This strategy for dealing with waste Both Events: Ringsend Technical Institute Cambridge is an integrated approach where no one waste management option can provide the solutions House, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4 for all waste. Combining the solutions means that waste production is reduced, recycling Dublin City Council have been hosting a series of Information Sessions on the Baseline (including composting) is minimised, waste monitoring for the Dublin Waste to Energy Project. These sessions have been held in that should not be landfilled but cannot be recycled is converted into energy and landfill September and November 2003 on Air Quality and Ecology respectively. As planned, is kept at a minimum. the sessions are set to continue now in the New Year and the next two issues to be dealt The Dublin Waste to Energy Project is with are Health and Traffic. being developed because the Regional Plan for Dublin, which was adopted by Dublin Information Sessions are being organised by Dublin City For inspectionCouncil purposesin response only. to requests City Council in 1998, identified the need Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. from the community for regular updates on the project, and for information around for thermal treatment. Following on from some key areas to be examined as part of baseline monitoring and the Environmental the adoption of the plan, a siting study was conducted which identified the preferred site Impact Assessment (i.e. Air Quality, Ecology, Health and Traffic). These Information for the development of the project on the Sessions are an opportunity to ask the project team and relevant experts about Health Poolbeg Peninsula. and Traffic issues that may be concerning you. Presentations will be made a number of Dublin City Council are now in the process times during the day and entertainment will be provided for children. of procuring a Service Provider to Design, Build, Operate and Finance the plant. The Dublin Waste to Energy Project is planning to build a thermal treatment plant Following a shortlisting process, four Service on the Poolbeg Peninsula to deal with 25% of waste from the Dublin Region. This is Providers have been invited to tender. It is hoped to appoint a service provider in in keeping with the objectives of the Regional Waste Management plan which also summer/autumn 2004. Once appointed, provides for waste minimisation, 59% recycling and 16% landfill. The project is in it will be the responsibility of the Service the preplanning stage and Dublin City Council is currently in the process of procuring Provider to compile an Environmental Impact Statement and undertake the statutory a developer. process. This includes getting planning If you would like more information, please do not hesitate to contact us at the approval from An Bord Pleanála, obtaining a licence to operate from the Environmental Ringsend Regional Office. Protection Agency and getting permission to generate and supply electricity from the Commission for Energy Regulation. These are three independent processes that allow for full participation on behalf the community. No development can commence on the Poolbeg Peninsula until and unless these three processes are successfully completed by the Service Provider.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03 Waste Wise Special Report - January 2004 - Page 2 Information Meeting Two - Ecology

The second Information Meeting was held last November and had the theme of Ecology.

The agenda for the evening started with Erling Poelsin from COWI. Erling is a a lengthy discussion and many questions were Elizabeth Arnett, Ringsend Regional Office, marine biologist who works for the company asked about ecological aspects of the project providing an update on the project and the providing environmental and engineering and waste management in general. work of the Ringsend Regional Office. consultancy to the project. The second A more detailed account of the meeting is The meeting then focused on the topic for presentation was from Eleanor Mayes an available from the Ringsend Regional Office, the evening, Ecology. There were two ecologist carrying out work in relation to Cambridge House, Cambridge Road, presentations on ecology including one from the birds in the Dublin Bay area. There was Ringsend Dublin 4.

An External Review Group has been Presentation: put in place to act as a quality Background to the Project and Progress to date control on the information that is being distributed about the Waste Elizabeth Arnett - Local Communications to Energy project by DCC. This group Co-Ordinator - Ringsend Regional Office. consists of two people who have a Elizabeth Arnett is an environmental scientist appointed and this is when the Statutory wealth of expertise and knowledge seconded to the Ringsend office from Process is planned to commence. in the areas of the environment RPS-MCOS. There are 3 statutory (legal authorisation) and regulation. Elizabeth explained that the Dublin processes that need to take place. Waste to Energy project forms part of the 1. An Environmental Impact Assessment • Anne Butler is a former director implementation of the Dublin Waste Plan (EIA) for the proposed plant has to be and will contribute to delivering waste of the Environmental Protection prepared and submitted to An Bord management for the Dublin Region. Pleanála for approval. Agency (EPA) and The process began when Dublin City Council 2. An application for a licence to operate the (DCC) commissioned a feasibility and siting •Dr. Ann Quinn is a former plant has to be made to the Environmental study. The results of this showed the preferred Protection Agency (EPA). Vice-Chairman of An Bord Pleanála site for a Thermal Treatment plant to be and currently lectures in Planning on the Poolbeg Peninsula. A team of 3. An application for a licence to produce electricity has to be made to the at the Dublin Institute of consultants were then appointed as the ‘client representative’ in order to appoint a Commission for Energy Regulation. Technology developer For for inspection the plant. purposes only. Elizabeth concluded the presentation by Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. urging the community to use the Ringsend Both of these experts can be The procurement process began in May 2002 when Expressions of Interest (EOI) were Regional Office and to take advantage of the contacted via the Ringsend office. sought from potential developers. These were opportunity to talk to Erling Poelsin and short-listed and 4 were selected to submit Eleanor Mays about ecology related issues at bids. In mid 2004 a developer will be the Information Session.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03 Waste Wise Special Report - January 2004 - Page 3

Presentation: Baseline Ecology Monitoring Presentation: Baseline Ecology Monitoring Erling Poelsin - COWI

Erling’s presentation took account of Conclusions: Eleanor Mayes - Ecologist questions that had already been identified The water quality of Dublin Bay is Eleanor Mayes’s presentation highlighted the by the community about baseline ecology generally good bird species that colonise the Dublin Bay area, monitoring for the Dublin Waste to Energy Heavy metals concentrations are generally low what they feed on and the numbers present. project: except that heavy metals tend to accumulate She explained that there are areas of the Bay Objective of the Baseline Monitoring: in the muddy sediments of Tolka estuary. that are protected under the EU Habitats •To investigate the existing environmental There is a rich fauna of benthic invertebrates Directive, for example, Bull Island which has conditions prior to the development of a in Dublin Bay. The following benthic fauna salt meadow and dunes. Waste to Energy Facility on the Poolbeg communities are found: Tellina, Macoma, Of the key species in the Dublin Bay there Peninsula (Baseline Study) Arba and Venus communities. are internationally important species present. • The baseline study will be used as In the Liffey, the riverbed is virtually devoid Some of these species are: background for the EIS which will be of fauna from Kingsbridge to about 1.5 km prepared by the developer once the tender below Butt Bridge, due to poor oxygen •Ducks are of national importance because has been decided. conditions. Further downstream fauna is of their numbers. 15% of the world’s population winter in Dublin Bay. Erling’s presentation then highlighted: present and progressively the fauna becomes more normal towards Poolbeg. • The Oystercatcher is nationally important •Water quality monitoring by Dublin City Council. Indicating how samples are taken Dublin Bay is an important habitat for fish. with just over 4,000 birds in the nation. and from where along with what is It is a nursery area for several species In the middle of winter they use the analysed. including dab, plaice, flounder and whiting. grass lands. The Bay is a zone of passage of migrating •Sediment and benthic fauna monitoring • The Ringed Glover - the total numbers salmon and sea trout. by Dublin City Council. Indicating where vary quite a bit probably related to the sample sites are and what is analysed. food supply. •Field study sampling sites around • The Great Glover, are more restricted in Dublin Bay. where they occur. • The Knot is in internationally important The agenda for the evening started with Elizabeth numbers in Dublin Bay. It reached important numbers in the last 3 years. Arnett, Ringsend Regional Office, providing For inspection purposes an updateonly. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. It is the third most important site for on the project and the work of the Ringsend Regional Knots in Ireland. Office. The meeting then focused on the topic for the • The Sanderling is a nationally important species. evening, Ecology. •Black tailed godwit. •Bar tailed godwit - both godwits are internationally important. •Curlew - largely North Bay. •Redshank - internationally important species. •Turnstone - species feed on mixed substrate and stones. Concluding remarks are that the proposed site was surveyed but the surrounding terrestrial areas have not been, for example the Nature Park, and this will be surveyed before the studies are concluded.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:03 Waste Wise Special Report - January 2004 - Page 4

Frequently asked questions about Thermal Treatment

What is incineration?

An Incinerator is any plant dedicated to the thermal treatment of The primary benefit of incineration is to reduce the volume of waste with or without energy recovery. Ireland’s policy is one of waste prior to final disposal. It stabilises and sanitises waste and has thermal treatment with energy recovery. This can include many the additional benefit of recovering energy in the form of heat and/or different technologies including pre-treatment processes in so far as the electricity which will displace the use of fossil fuels. substances resulting from the treatments are subsequently incinerated.

Do Emissions from incinerators harm health and the environment? NO

Properly managed and monitored Municipal Waste Incinerators do like smoking, traffic, illegal burning of waste - even home heating not impact on the environment, health or food quality. This is because systems. What determines whether they do us harm is the amount incineration of waste is strictly controlled and the gases emitted are or DOSE we are exposed to. Common chemicals like salt can be toxic cleaned and scrubbed to ensure that any emissions are extremely low. to the human body if taken in large enough quantities. Even if all However, incinerators do emit a broad spectrum of chemicals to the seven municipal waste incinerators required under the regional waste environment - albeit in extremely small quantities. These include management plans were built in Ireland - they would contribute less carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides (Nox), arsenic, cadmium, lead, than 2% of the dioxins emitted to air (EPA, 2001). Most dioxins mercury, benzenes, dioxins and furans. Many opponents of incineration will continue to come from uncontrolled, illegal burning of waste argue that because incinerators emit these chemicals they should not be in back gardens. In fact incinerators, even in rural areas contribute built. However, difficult as it may be to believe, chemicals like dioxins less than a few percent of all chemicals emitted to existing already exist in our environment and come from very familiar sources background levels.

What are dioxins?

Dioxins are the unwanted by-product of low temperature, uncontrolled body for a very long period of time. There are many sources of dioxins burning. At a certain dosage, 17 have been identified as posing a risk to to the Irish environment including smoking, transport, home heating human health. Most of our exposure (over 90%) to dioxins comes and some types of industrial processes but back-yard burning of waste through the food chain. They persist in body fat and remain in the is the single greatest source of dioxins to the Irish environment. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

If dioxins are so toxic, and incinerators produce them, surely building incinerators will increase the levels of dioxins in the Irish environment! WRONG

Properly managing our waste will reduce the impact waste has on has the least possible impact on the environment will involve providing our environment - including dioxin emissions. Currently most dioxins all of the infrastructure necessary to maximise recycling, recover energy come from uncontrolled backyard burning of waste. Most of this waste from the waste that can not be recycled and keep landfill to a should be recycled with the remainder going to disposal in properly minimum. Backyard burning usually occurs at a temperature of about managed incinerators or landfill sites. If all of the waste that is currently 300 - 400 °C which is the temperature at which dioxins are formed. being burned illegally was handled in this way - the levels of dioxins in Incinerators burn waste at over 850°C, the temperature at which Ireland would decrease dramatically. Ensuring that waste management dioxins are destroyed.

Have you any questions about the Dublin Waste to Energy Project?

Please send any questions you have to: Elizabeth Arnett, Local Communications Co-Ordinator at the Dublin City Council, Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4. Ph 01 2815918 Fax 01 6606921 Web www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

MARCH 2004

You are invited to... What you’ve told us INFORMATION SESSION 4: TRAFFIC for the Dublin Waste to Energy Hundreds of people attended the three Information Sessions held in September Project on Saturday 3rd April from 12 noon to 4.30 pm in Ringsend and November 2003 and February 2004. Technical Institute, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4 We have used your feedback from Experts will be on hand to answer questions regarding the impact of the project on traffic in the area. Information Session 2: Ecology, held on There will also be a presentation covering: 12th November 2004, to help structure • current traffic in the area the format for Information Session 3 and • baseline studies being carried out 4 and the following is a broad selection • possible solutions to potential problems. of comments received:

A range of experts will also be on hand to answer general questions about the proposed Poolbeg ‘We would like more information on Thermal Treatment project such as the statutory process, air quality, monitoring and licensing of the incineration in general’ proposed facility and thermal treatment. …‘The meeting was a good attempt to There will also be experts available to provide practical advice and information about composting and deal with quite a complex subject’… recycling in your area as part of the Dublin Waste Management Plan’s goal to achieve 59% recycling across the four Dublin local authorities. …‘The period for presentations was too This series of Information Sessions is being facilitated by Dublin City Council. Other Information Sessions long and the period for questions too have been held on Air Quality, Ecology and Health and interest has been very keen - see page 3 for an short’… For inspection purposes only. overview of issues raised. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. ‘The information was interesting and good but we had hoped for more Traffic Monitoring information on the impacts of incineration’

Baseline monitoring of the traffic aspect of the project is currently being undertaken. This will feed into the Traffic Impact Assessment which will examine any possible impacts the proposed development will See inside for: have on traffic and looks at ways of reducing this impact. The Traffic Impact Assessment will form an important part of the Environmental Impact Statement. • Revised Project Timeline

• Opening of New Recycling Centre

• Summary Information Session 3

• Questions Raised at Information Session 3 Presentation at Information Session 3 by Professor Dr. Dieter Schrenk.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

What is Dublin’s Waste Plan?

The plan for managing Dublin’s waste, aims to provide a fully integrated waste management system for the region. This Dublin Regional Waste Management Plan will reduce the amount of waste generated, recycle as much waste as possible (59%), recover energy from waste that cannot be recycled (25%) and landfill any waste that is leftover (16%). Late Night Opening Hours Ringsend Recycling Centre

Cllr Eibhlinn Byrne officially opening the Ringsend Recycling Centre on behalf of Lord Mayor Royston Brady.

of strategic importance in helping the city to achieve its recycling targets,” says Matt Twomey, Assistant City Manager. “They will allow Dublin City Council to divert in the region of 10,000 tonnes of household waste away from landfill annually.”

“This latest recycling initiative by Dublin City Council will be a marvellous resource for local people and I am confident that the late opening hours during the week will encourage many more people to start recycling,” predicts Cllr Eibhlinn Byrne officially opening the Ringsend Recycling Centre on behalf of Lord Mayor Royston Brady. Lord Mayor Cllr Royston Brady and he urged people to use the Recycling Centre to reduce the amount of waste Dublin City Council took yet another step towards waste engine oil and cooking oil. Car and domestic going to landfill. reaching its 59% recycling target by this integrated system batteries, light bulbs and fluorescent tubes, household when it opened its new Recycling Centre in Ringsend, on garden waste, household chemical waste such as garden Dublin City Council are making great progress in the corner of Pigeon House Road and Sean Moore Road fertilisers, paints and aerosols, as well as plastic, paper, implementing the Waste Management Plan, diverting in February. The City’s newest recycling facility is the first glass and aluminium packaging, will all be accepted. as much as 40,000 tonnes of material away from landfill For inspection purposes only. to stay open from 9am until 8pm Monday to Friday, Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. each year and achieving a recycling rate of 20% of “The new Ringsend Recycling Centre and the one in as well as from 9am-4pm on Saturdays, and accepts household waste. It is certain that this figure will continue Shamrock Terrace, off the North Strand, represent a huge a wide range of household recyclable materials, including to rise with the opening of this new Recycling Centre investment in recycling for Dublin City Council and are fridges, TVs and furniture as well as mobile phones, and as other initiatives come on stream.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

Report - Information Session 3

Modern Incinerators pose no Harmful Effects to Public Health says International Medical Expert International toxicologist and medical doctor Dr Dieter Schrenk, Professor of Food Chemistry & Environmental Toxicology, University of Kaiserlautern, Germany, gave two presentations during the afternoon. Professor Schrenk, who has worked with the World Health Organisation (WHO) as a consultant, said that there are no harmful effects to public health from living in the vicinity of a modern waste incineration plant and he said this has been proven categorically by a study in Germany, where exhaustive studies of the area surrounding an incinerator in Augsburg showed there was no perceptible impact on the environment. Profesor Schrenk also confirmed that dioxin levels are falling in Europe at a time when waste incineration is increasing. 'Section of crowd in attendance at Information Session in Ringsend Technical Institute on Saturday 21st February 2004. “Because most airborne dioxins in Ireland are generated as a result of open fires and backyard burning, the Irish outstanding health issues they might have had. In order to representatives from the four local authorities in Dublin Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has predicted accommodate those who had more general queries about were on hand to answer questions about recycling and that municipal waste incinerators will not increase dioxin the project, an open forum was held at 4.00pm, attended waste management issues in their area. Other experts levels in Ireland. Waste treatment in modern incinerators, by a panel of experts, including officials from Dublin were also available to answer questions on the planning operated to EU Standards, is a minor source of dioxins,” City Council. process, the monitoring and licensing of the proposed he said. facility, thermal treatment, air quality, food safety and any In addition, there were numerous displays about the general questions relating to the project. Following his presentation, members of the public were Dublin Regional Waste Management Plan and invited to ask questions and seek clarification of any

Waste Management in Europe

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 Your Questions and Answers

What is incineration?

An Incinerator is any plant dedicated to the thermal treatment of waste with or without The primary benefit of incineration is to reduce the volume of waste prior to final disposal. energy recovery. Ireland’s policy is one of thermal treatment with energy recovery. It stabilises and sanitises waste and has the additional benefit of recovering energy in the This can include many different technologies including pre-treatment processes in so far form of heat and/or electricity which will displace the use of fossil fuels. as the substances resulting from the treatments are subsequently incinerated.

Do emissions from incinerators harm human health and the environment?

Properly managed and monitored Municipal Waste Incinerators do not impact on the traffic, illegal burning of waste – even home heating systems. What determines whether environment, health or food quality. This is because incineration of waste is strictly they do us harm is the amount or DOSE we are exposed to. Common chemicals like salt controlled and the gases emitted are cleaned and scrubbed to ensure that any emissions can be toxic to the human body if taken in large enough quantities. Even if all seven are extremely low. However, incinerators do emit a broad spectrum of chemicals to the municipal waste incinerators required under the regional waste management plans were environment – albeit in extremely small quantities. These include carbon monoxide, built in Ireland – they would contribute less than 2% of the dioxins emitted to air (EPA nitrogen oxides (Nox), arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, benzenes, dioxins and furans. 2001). Most dioxins will continue to come from uncontrolled, illegal burning of waste in Many opponents of incineration argue that because incinerators emit these chemicals they back gardens. In fact incinerators, even in rural areas contributes less than a few percent of should not be built. However, difficult as it may be to believer, chemicals like dioxins all chemicals emitted to existing background levels. already exist in our environment and come from very familiar sources like smoking,

What are dioxins?

Dioxins are the unwanted by-product of low temperature, uncontrolled burning. to the Irish environment including smoking, transport, home heating and some types of At a certain dosage, 17 have been identified as posing a risk to human health. Most of our industrial processes but back-yard burning of waste is the single greatest source of dioxins exposure (over 90%) to dioxins comes through the food chain. They persist in body fat to the Irish environment. and remain in the body for a very long period of time. There are many sources of dioxins

When did the new modern incineration technology start?

The new technology started as a result of EU Directives. In Germany the standards began improving around 1990 but in some places incinerators have been running for 20 years at these standards. In many European countries, incinerators that did not meet the new standards were closed down.

As well as monitoring the vicinity of incinerators, have the vicinity of landfills for fly ash or transhipment stations been monitored too?

For inspection purposes only. Fly ash will have to be landfilled in a hazardous waste landfill. Any such facilityConsent requiresof copyright a ownerlicence required to operate for any other and use. is subject to very strict monitoring. A couple of years ago there was monitoring of the blood of personnel handling fly ash material – this is documented.

Where is the incinerator going to be?

Following the adoption of the Dublin Regional Waste Management Plan, a study was carried out re. location of the proposed facility. A long list of sites was examined and then a short-list of sites compiled. The preferred site is a location next to the sewage treatment plant.

What are the changes in incineration technology?

The first incinerators in Europe were built in 1960’s. These would have operated to the standards that were set at that time. However in many countries newer ones have replaced these old incinerators, as they did not meet the newer modern standards set in the EU Directive on Incineration. Any thermal treatment plant proposed for Ireland will operate to the highest standards set out in legislation and will be monitored to ensure that this is the case.

If you would like more information about any aspect of the Dublin Waste to Energy Project, why not contact Elizabeth Arnett, Local Communications Co-ordinator at the Dublin City Council, Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4. Ph 01 2815918 Fax 01 6606921 Web www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 Special Report June 2004

DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL LAUNCH WASTE MANAGEMENT ANNUAL REPORT

The Dublin City Council Waste Management Plan Annual Report was launched on 3rd April 2004. The City Council spent e72.7 million providing waste collection, disposal and street cleaning services in 2003, including sweeping 2,400km of footpaths and bridges and servicing 5,000 litter bins every day. Launching the Report, Cllr Deirdre Heney, Deputy Lord Mayor, called on the people of Dublin to play their part in keeping the city clean and to stop littering.

“There are more resources going into waste management than ever before and it doesn’t make sense that we have to spend more money each year on clearing litter from our streets,” said Cllr Deirdre Heney, Deputy Lord Mayor. “The problem is not cleaning resources – the City Council is now cleaning around the clock. The problem is the citizens of Dublin, who throw papers, bottles, cans, takeaway For inspection purposes only. wrappings, cigarettes and chewing gum on our streets.Consent It’s ofup copyright to owner Deputyrequired Lord for any Mayor other Cllr. use. Deirdre Heney and Assistant City Manager Matt Twomey, at the launch of the Dublin City Council Waste Management each one of us to do everything we can to prevent and stop litter Plan Annual Report in Dublin.” • A pilot project to collect plastic bottles from homes is As well as highlighting the new street cleaning and litter control proposed for later this year. regime, the report also outlines the progress that has been made to date with regard to recycling and waste collection, as well as future “Our 20% recycling rate has been achieved through providing an plans for waste management. extensive network of new infrastructure, information campaigns and excellent public co-operation,” said Matt Twomey, Assistant Dublin City is now recycling 20% of waste, or 40,000 tonnes City Manager. “However, recycling alone will not deal with all of through: our waste. We brought more than 200,000 tonnes of household • 126,000 household green bins and commercial waste to our landfill facility at Arthurstown last year • 100 Glass Banks which is closing at the end of 2007, so it is vital that we proceed with • 11 Bring Centres and 2 larger Recycling Centres at the implementation of our Thermal Treatment Facilities.” Ringsend and North Strand A modern thermal treatment plant, run to the highest international • The green bin service is being extended to all schools and standards, is proposed for the Poolbeg Peninsula. A preferred bidder apartments in 2004 and Green Bags will be distributed to design, build, operate and finance the plant will be selected by to homes that cannot facilitate wheeled bins this year the end of 2004. A number of other initiatives with regard to waste • Dublin City Council plans to start collecting tetra pak management are planned for the coming year including pay by (milk and juice cartons) in the green bin or bag this volume/use and reintroduction of bulky household waste collection (Spring / Summer) of items such as mattresses, cookers and furniture.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 Waste Wise Special Report - June 2004 - Page 2

REPORT ON INFORMATION SESSION 4 : TRAFFIC

Members of the public enjoying Information Session 4

Keeping the public informed has been an integral part of Ms. Geraldine Keary, Associate with Engineering and Environmental the Dublin Waste to Energy Project to date. In order to do this Consultants RPS-MCOS, gave two presentations on traffic baseline Dublin City Council has facilitated a number of information sessions monitoring throughout the day. Ms. Keary began by giving a broad For inspection purposes only. on various topics, identified by the community as beingConsent important of copyright owner requiredoverview for any of other how use. traffic baseline monitoring is carried out in the area. to them. So far these information sessions have looked at the baseline Six junctions were monitored for traffic flows and for all calculations monitoring of Air Quality, Ecology and Health. The final session in maximum impact conditions were assumed i.e. all trucks going directly this series took place on 3rd April and looked at the Traffic aspects of to the plant, in normal working hours, using the most direct route and the project. based on a figure of 200 round trips to the plant each day. The number of trips includes both the waste going into the plant and the residual ash going out. Based on the 2003 figures, preliminary results of this monitoring show that the effect of the plant on traffic flows during the morning and evening peak is negligible (see graphs).

In any event it is likely that a number of mitigation measures will be imposed to reduce the potential impact of traffic on the surrounding area. Examples of such measures could include maximising use of the M50 for trucks, bulk transportation of waste to cut down on the number of trucks going to the plant and flexible delivery times. Such measures will be investigated fully in the Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) section of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Once the service provider has been appointed, they will need to carry out an EIS which will be submitted to An Bord Pleanála for approval. All of the results of baseline monitoring to date will be given to the service provider for inclusion in the EIS. Geraldine Keary presenting the results of Baseline Traffic Monitoring at Information Session 4

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 Waste Wise Special Report - June 2004 - Page 3

Tetra Pak Initiative for Dublin : TRAFFIC Householders Launched 2003 AM Peak (08:15 – 09:15) Mr Martin Cullen, TD, Minister for the Environment, Heritage & Local Government, launched an initiative to recycle 100 million milk, juice Tetra Pak cartons consist of 2500 and soup “Tetra Pak” cartons, on 5th May 2004. a layer of paper board, laminated on each side by a layer of very thin polyethylene to seal in the contents and protect the food from bacteria and moisture. The 2000 300,000 Dublin householders who have a Green Bin collection can now put their beverage cartons into the Green Bin for recycling. The initiative is a partnership 1500 between the four Dublin local authorities (Dublin City Council and Fingal, South Dublin and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Councils) and Tetra Pak Ireland, 1000 Bailey Waste Recycling, Oxigen Environmental Ltd and Repak Ltd.

500 “Dublin Householders use about 133 million one-litre beverage cartons per year. With full participation by all Dublin householders who already have a green bin 0 collection, we can potentially recycle three quarters of those cartons every year, East Link Sean Moore Beach Church Irishtown thus diverting 2,850 tonnes away from landfill annually,” said Matt Twomey, Road Road Road Avenue Road Assistant Dublin City Manager.

2003 without Plant 2003 with Plant

2003 PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00)

2500

2000

1500

1000

500 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

0 East Link Sean Moore Beach Church Irishtown Road Road Road Avenue Road Caroline Clancy, Dublin City Council, Minister for Environment Heritage and Local 2003 without Plant 2003 with Plant Government, Martin Cullen and Ann-Marie Fitzpatrick, South Dublin County Council, at the launch of the Dublin Tetra Pak Initiative

Following the presentations on baseline traffic One bale of Tetra Pak beverage cartons is recycled somewhere in the world every monitoring, members of the public were invited to ask minute. More than 98% of recycling occurs at paper mills using a process called questions and seek clarification of any outstanding issues re-pulping to separate the fibres (75% of the carton) from other materials such as relating to the traffic aspect of the project (see overleaf). polyethylene and aluminium. An open forum discussion was also held to facilitate those who had more general queries about the project. The cartons from Dublin are sent to Smith Anderson & Co paper mill in Scotland Members of the project team, officials from Dublin City where they are used in the production of paper products such as paper reels, paper Council and a panel of experts on various aspects of the bags and envelopes. Householders are asked to please empty the beverage cartons and simply rinse, drip-dry and flatten them before putting them out for recycling. project attended this. “I am delighted to see a major packaging producer such as Tetra Pak taking a lead to recycle their product, in partnership with the local authorities and the recycling industry,” said Martin Cullen, TD, Minister for the Environment, Heritage & Local Government. “My Department is also working towards achieving a door-to-door collection of plastic bottles in Dublin and we hope to do a pilot project later this year.”

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 Waste Wise Special Report - June 2004 - Page 4

Questions and Answers

The presentation said there would be 200 trucks a day — that is 400 truck trips. How did you get to that figure when the amount of waste is 500,000 tonnes? Is that 200 trucks over a 5 or 7 days a week? Is 200 trucks a day a realistic figure or not — I would like to know how you got to it as that would be 36 round trips an hour and that means one truck in less than every minute?

Take the figure of 500,000 tonnes of waste being delivered to the plant for 250 days of the year gives you 200 trucks. Each truck was based on a calculation of an average 10 tonne capacity. The information gathered was used to decide how many 10 tonne trucks, how many 12 tonne trucks, and how many 15 tonne trucks each local authority in the Dublin Region would use. The calculations were based on a 5.5 day week, as there is a half-day on a Saturday and are based on a worst-case scenario, that is, every vehicle goes to the plant after collecting waste. The realistic scenario is that vehicles would take waste to transfer stations first where the waste would be compressed and put into larger 24 tonne vehicles which would reduce the numger of movements.

I am concerned with how you will handle the fly ash, as it is dangerous? Will it be at the transfer stations?

Fly ash is considered hazardous, whereas the bottom ash is non-hazardous. There are no facilities in Ireland at present to deal with hazardous waste so it will be transported outside of Ireland where there are facilities. It is likely to be transported off the peninsula to ship and travel out to Germany or England. This will be fully in accordance with European Union (EU) law and is in fact encouraged as the fly ash can be used for useful purposes in other countries.

What is the design capacity that this plant is being built to handle and how much waste was produced in 2003? If we manage to reduce our waste where does the plant get the rest of the waste to feed it?

The plant is designed to handle 500,000 tonnes of waste and in 2003 roughly 400,000 tonnes of waste was collected from the four Dublin Authorities. There are no plans to bring waste in from outside the Dublin Region. There is the Local Authority waste stream, which is about 400,000 tonnes, and then there is commercial waste, which is about 300,000 tonnes of waste. Recycling will contribute to reducing that figure but there is an underlying increase in per capita waste production. An Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report in 2002 stated that there For was inspection a 65% purposesincrease only.in municipal waste between 1999-2000. Ireland is in the bottom Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. third in Europe for per capita waste generation unlike countries such as Netherlands and Denmark.

The traffic flow charts show the a.m. and p.m. periods. Did you do a study on interim hours?

The interim hours are being looked at very closely at the moment with 24 hour counts of those sites being commissioned. There are dips where it may be more suitable to transport waste in the off peak times.

What proportion of truck journeys will come over the Ringsend Bridge?

Currently there are 11% of heavy vehicles on the Irishtown Road and it will go up to approx 13% with the plant in place. However An Bord Pleanela can designate routes if they want to and at this stage we have no idea what, if any routes they might select.

Have you any questions about the Dublin Waste to Energy Project?

Please send any questions you have to: Elizabeth Arnett, Local Communications Co-Ordinator at the Dublin City Council, Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4. Ph 01 2815918 Fax 01 6606921 Web www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie

EPAPRINTED Export ON RECYCLED 25-07-2013:19:25:04 PAPER October 2004

YOU ARE INVITED TO…

INFORMATION SESSION 6: INCINERATION TECHNOLOGIES for the Dublin Waste to Energy Project on Saturday 13th November from 12 noon to 4.30 pm in Ringsend Technical Institute, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4 Experts will be on hand to deliver a presentation on the types of to answer general questions about the proposed development such incineration technologies that are available. The presentation will as the statutory process, air quality, monitoring and licensing of also cover the incineration process and provide examples from the proposed facility and traffic. other countries in Europe. A range of experts will also be on hand INFORMATION SESSION 5 - STATUTORY PROCESS

The latest in the series of Information Sessions on the Dublin Waste to Energy Project, was held on 25th September, in Ringsend Technical Institute. The information sessions, which are facilitated by Dublin City Council, aim to provide information to the local community regarding a number For of inspection topics purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. they have raised. To date, the sessions have dealt with the baseline monitoring of Air Quality, Ecology, Health and Traffic. venue, urging visitors not to attend the session, as CRAI claimed The latest Information Session dealt with the Statutory Process. that attending the meeting would inhibit them from taking legal In order for an incinerator to be built, there are three main action at a later stage in the process. Assistant City Manager, statutory processes that must be fulfilled. The service provider Matt Twomey, who was in attendance, stated that attending the will need to obtain: Information Session would not put a restriction on any future • planning permission from An Bord Pleanála objections. He said, “People not familiar with the statutory • a waste licence from the EPA processes can find them confusing so this is a great opportunity for people to come along and ask the expert planners exactly what • a licence to generate electricity from the Commission they can expect to see happen and how they can get involved in for Energy Regulation (CER) the process. While it will be next year before the chosen service Both the application for planning permission and the application provider is in a position to lodge a planning or licence for the waste licence, provide the best opportunities for members application, we are continuing our policy of holding regular of the public to register their views or objections on the proposed Open Days to let people know well in advance how the project development. Two presentations were given on the day, which is progressing and to give them ongoing information. I find it explained to the public both the planning application and the strange, therefore, that people are protesting over an information waste licensing phases. meeting that is advising how to participate in the statutory process and how people can object to this if they want to.” A protest was held on the morning of the Information Session. The protest was organised by local group, Combined Residents Despite the protest, a number of people came in to attend the Against Incineration(CRAI) and, apart from local residents, first round of presentations, to view the displays and have their was attended by some of the area elected public representatives. questions answered by the experts on hand. The presentation was Approximately 30 people were in attendance at the gate of the repeated in the afternoon and the session was also well attended.

This project is being co-financed by the Cohesion Fund of the European Union EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 Waste Wise - October 2004 - Page 2

Summary of the Planning Application Procedure

Maria Lombard, Director of Planning with persons are given the chance to put opportunity for members of the public to planning consultants RPS Mc Hugh, gave their case before the Board. This is the become involved. However, she stressed the the first presentation. Ms. Lombard gave third possible opportunity for public importance of the timescales throughout a step-by-step breakdown of the procedure involvement. Following the oral hearing, the whole procedure. Submissions and that the service provider must go through the inspector who has been in charge makes observations must be made by the stated in order to obtain planning approval. This a recommendation to the members of An time limit and late entries will not be procedure is illustrated in the flow chart Bord Pleanála. It is important to note that accepted. She also pointed out that that below. In the case of the proposed the members do not have to agree with the submissions and observations cannot be incinerator, it is necessary for approval to be recommendations of the inspector. frivolous but must be based on the potential sought directly from An Bord Pleanála, as consequences for the environment and on an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Ms. Lombard pointed out that the many the proper planning and sustainable is required as part of the development. different stages involved in the planning development of the area. approval process, provide ample The first step to be undertaken is to publish a notice in the newspaper. This notice will describe the location and nature of the Planning Approval Procedure proposed development, state that approval is being sought from An Bord Pleanála and Newspaper that an EIS is being submitted. It must also Notice give details of when and where the EIS and application can be inspected free of charge by members of the public (a period of not Public Display of Submissionsless received than from 6 weeks) any per andson it will invite them to Prescribed EIS & Application EIS and Application make submissions or observations in writing Authorities Documents Opportunity for Public Submissions to to An Bord Pleanála within that display An Bord Pleanála not less Submiss period. This is the first definite Wri than 6 Weeks tten

opportunity at which members of ions Oral Submissions the public can become involved. ions by those who tten have already Wri

A copy of the application for approval Publication of Oral made Written Submission after Newspaper Notice Submiss Submissions and the EIS must also be sent to certain Submissions prescribed bodies such as the Heritage Potential Request An Bord Pleanála (ABP) Possible Oral Oral Submissions Council, An Taisce, Bord Fáilte Eireann, Report by for Further Consideration Hearing by Applicant the Dublin Transportation Office etc. to Inspector ForInformation inspection purposes only. No afford them an opportunity to make Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Possible Re submissions or observations. Observatio Possible Oral Response quest for Submissions by Preparation and people who have ions In some cases, An Bord Pleanála may Lodgement of Further tten ns not made Written Submissions on objections Wri request additional information from the Information Representation received by the Agency Submiss applicant in relation to the effects of some where it is in the Interests aspect of the project, on the environment. Possible Further Public Display of of Justice Newspaper Notice if If An Bord Pleanála considers that this Further Information Environmental Further Information and Opportunity Protection contains significant additional information, Significant then it may request the applicant to publish for Public Agency Submission on No Specified Period a further notice in the newspapers and Further Information for ABP Consideration invite members of the public to comment to ABP not less on the further information. In such a case, than 3 weeks the further information shall be placed on public display for a period of not less than three weeks. This is the second possible An Bord Pleanála step at which members of the public Order can become involved. In some cases, An Bord Pleanála may decide to hold an oral hearing. Generally, Grant Permission Grant Refuse Permission with Conditions Permission for Specified Reason(s) Grant a licenceoral without hearings conditions are held where it will help the Grant a licenceunderstanding with conditions, ofor a case that is particularly Refuse a licencecomplex or where there are significant national or local issues involved. If it is Conditions may not Refusal may be based decided to hold an oral hearing, both the relate to Control on Environmental applicant and anyone who has made a of Emissions Grounds Decision published and placed on public display submission or observation will be notified of the time and venue. Both the applicant and those who have made submissions/ observations and possibly other interested

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 Waste Wise - October 2004 - Page 3

Summary of the Application Procedure to the EPA

Anne Butler, an environmental consultant to the environment, which must be adhered obtained by contacting the EPA and former Director with the EPA, gave the to for the facility to operate. Headquarters in Wexford. second presentation. Ms. Butler provided an overview of the EPA licensing process and Prior to applying for a licence, the applicant On receipt of a completed application the opportunities it provides for members must erect a site notice and publish a notice and submissions, the EPA will make a of the public to get involved. This is set out in the newspaper of its intention to apply. ‘draft decision’ and will issue it to both in the flow chart below. In order for the Both the licence application and the EIS are the applicant and to those who made proposed incinerator to go ahead, it must then sent into the EPA. At that stage, it is submissions and put it on the website. also receive a licence from the EPA. This open for anyone to make a submission on An opportunity is then provided for the licence, if granted will set out strict controls an application, within a specified time applicant or any other person to make an and emission limits with regard to emissions frame. Details of the application can be objection on the ‘draft decision’, again within a specified time frame. All objections are circulated to all the interested parties EPA Licensing Procedure and they may then make submissions on the objections of others.

Applicant publishes intention to apply for a licence and erects a site notice Following this stage, the EPA may decide to hold an oral hearing. All those who have Newspaper Notice made objections and the applicant will be Applicant applies for a licence notified of the date and time of the oral hearing, at which all parties will be heard.

Submissions received from any person A report of the oral hearing is prPrescreparibeded, EIS & Application and the Board of the EPA will Authoritiesconsider Documents Agency publishes proposal to grant or refuse a licence ("Draft Decision") this report, as well as any objections and

Submiss submissions, when making its decision. Wri tten

All the relevant parties will be informed ions Objection received from any person or the applicant of the decision and it will be posted on the EPA website. Publication of Submission after Agency circulates all objections to all interested parties who may make Once a facility is granted a licence by submissions on objections of others For inspection purposes only. the EPA, the Office ofPotential Envir onmentalRequest An Bord Plean Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Enforcement (OEE) willfor enforce Further the Consideration Information No licence. This is done through monitoring Agency decides to hold an Oral Hearing and reporting by the licensee, audits and unannounced inspectionsPrepar ationand monitoringand Lodgement of Further tten ions Yes Submissions on objections Wri by the OEE. Ms. ButlerInformation stressed that the received by the Agency Submiss Agency appoints person/s to conduct hearing proposed facility will need to obtain both All relevant persons notified of location Possible Further and date planning approval from An Bord PleanálaPublic Display of Newspaper Notice if Further Information and a licence from Furtherthe EPA, Information in order to and Opportunity Significant proceed. When carrying out the for Public Oral Hearing enforcement procedures, the EPA has the Submission on Further Information powers to revoke or suspend a licence if theto ABP not less conditions set down in it are not met. than 3 weeks

Report and recommendations to Agency This would mean cessation of any activity until measures are put in place to bring

the facility back into line with its licensing An Bord Plean conditions. Order Agency considers objections, submissions and report of oral hearing

Grant Permission Grant with Conditions Permission Agency decides to: Grant a licence without conditions Grant a licence with conditions, or Refuse a licence

Conditions may not relate to Control of Emissions All relevant parties notified Decision published and placed on public display

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

Waste Wise - October 2004 - Page 4

Questions and Answers

The statutory planning process seems very complicated - would the ordinary person be able to oppose the plant?

In general the public are becoming more aware of and more involved in the planning process. Planning applications for most large developments in Dublin City for example would be the subject of observations and objections by members of the public to Dublin City Council and An Bord Pleanála. In the case of the proposed incinerator, the community need to watch out for the notice of the application in the newspaper which will specify the duration of the application/EIS public display period and objection period, which will be a minimum period of 6 weeks. The application and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on display will contain drawings of the scheme, visuals, information on the technology proposed, operational practices of the plant etc. There is a legal requirement for the EIS to contain a non-technical summary, as a lot of the information contained in an EIS is technical by nature. The non-technical summary should be easy to understand for a member of the public without a technical background.

Which (statutory) process comes first?

The planning process and licensing process are independent processes. They can run simultaneously or either can come first. An Bord Pleanála can request information from the EPA.

At what stage can the non-technical summary be obtained?

It is part of the EIS. It will be presented when the application is formally lodged with An Bord Pleanála and/or with the EPA. It has to go on public display and it is intended that it will be placed in Dublin City Council offices and the local Ringsend Regional office. The definite details of where it will be displayed will be specified in the newspaper notice.

Will the EPA take the disposal of residual waste – bottom ash and fly ash – into account?

The EPA will consider the application and all of the information received in submissions and objections before it makes its decision. The EPA can only decide to grant a licence if it is satisfied that the facility can operate without causing environmental pollution. Generally when the EPA grants a licence it does For so inspection with conditions purposes only. attached and these would deal with all aspects of the operation Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. including issues such as disposal of bottom and fly ash

Can we quantify the amount of waste resulting from incineration? Is it likely that there will be a market for the bottom ash?

Following incineration bottom ash will be formed and will weigh about 25% of the weight of the incoming waste (it will however have a greatly reduced volume). Fly ash will also be formed during the combustion process and this is a hazardous waste which will weigh 3% approx of the weight of the incoming waste. There will certainly be a use for the bottom ash. Bottom ash will be used as construction material, in other countries it is used under roads, footpaths and as a light concrete block. Currently there are no facilities to dispose of hazardous waste in Ireland. Typically this waste is disposed of in salt mines in Germany where it is used to stabilise old salt mines. Limestone is mixed with flue gas residues and mixed with cement to stabilise it and then it is piped in. Research is currently going on to see if it can be recycled. Fly as is an alkaline material and there are experiments going on in other countries to see if it can be used to stabilise acid materials.

Have you any questions about the Dublin Waste to Energy Project?

Please send any questions you have to: Elizabeth Arnett, Local Communications Co-Ordinator at the Dublin City Council, Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4. Ph 01 2815918 Fax 01 6606921 Web www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie

EPAPRINTED Export ON RECYCLED 25-07-2013:19:25:04 PAPER OCTOBER 2005

Dublin City Council appoints ELSAM Ireland to Design, Build, Operate and Finance the Incinerator at Poolbeg

Dublin City Council has appointed in relation to this. All interested groups Elsam Ireland to design, build, operate and individuals will be formally and finance the incinerator at Poolbeg. consulted when this statutory process WN Generating begins in early 2006. Station Dublin City Council will now request Sean Moore Elsam Ireland to prepare an “We have been communicating with Park D Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) the Community on this project for the to assess all relevant impacts of the last four years and we will continue to Site Location Sandymount proposed plant on the local do so in the lead up to and during the Strand environment; including traffic and air statutory consultation phase which quality assessments. The Department begins in 2006,” says Matt Twomey, of Environment, Heritage and Local Assistant City Manager, Dublin Fig 1: Preferred site for the development of the Government have raised no objections City Council. Dublin Waste to Energy Plant

As part of the statutory process Elsam Ireland will have to successfully apply to three independent bodies before the incinerator can go ahead: An Bord Pleanála for planning permission Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for a Waste Licence to treat approximately 550,000 tonnes (25%) of Dublin’s household & commercial waste annually at the facility For inspection purposes only. Commission for Energy Regulation for Consenta licence of copyright to generate owner required and supply for any otherheat/electricity use. from the plant.

The statutory process for the incinerator includes six weeks formal public consultation.

Who are Elsam and what will they do?

Elsam is a Danish company with over terms of incineration has been of other facilities throughout the 40 years experience as an energy with the most modern up-to-date country. They have been appointed provider and has been at the forefront incineration technology. Elsam to design, build, operate and finance of developing new generation waste currently operate 6 incineration the Dublin Waste to Energy Plant in to energy facilities in Denmark. This facilities in Denmark and they have a public private partnership with means that all of their experience in been involved in designing a number Dublin City Council.

Elsam Ireland will :

prepare an Environmental Impact Statement on all likely impacts Horsens Kraftvarmevaerk A/S of the plant in 2005; submit the EIS to An Bord Pleanála for planning permission in early 2006; apply to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for an operating licence; apply to the Commission for Energy Regulation for a licence to generate and supply heat/electricity from the plant.

Dublin City Council hopes that construction and commissioning of the proposed facility will be completed by 2009/2010.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 2001 20022003 200420052006200 PUBLIC CONSULTATION CLIENT REPRESENTATIVE Information Opened in Ringsend Spring Summ Local Co-ordinator Appointed Service science, wastemanagement,procurement andpublicinvolvement. Private Partnershiptodesign,build,operateandfinancetheplant.Theconsortiumincludedexpertiseinenvironmental Dublin CityCouncilappointedaconsor The ProcurementandSelectionProcess began aseriesofInformationSessions. public raised,DublinCityCouncil and concernsthatmembersofthe In response to the questions,issues Information Sessions monitoring programme. account duringthebaseline raised bythegroup were takeninto produced areport. Alltheissues had abouttheproject andthegroup separate concernsthatthecommunity The development tolocalresidents. information abouttheproposed which wasproposed toprovide The Group (CIG) Community Interest A Local InvolvementintheRingsendCommunity FAR... SO that havebeenutilisedtoinformthepublicaboutprojectarehighlightedbelow: a n senior official CityCouncilandanenvironmentalscientistfromtheprojectteam.Thedifferent fromDublin methods Communications information serviceopenedintheRingsendRegionalOffice in2001.Theoffice hasfulltimestaff available,including CIG CIG meetingsraisedalmost200 was avoluntaryprocess, Committee Appointed Selection er Autumn Procurement Developed Appointed CIG Open Day Project itrSpringSumm Winter of Project Appointment Procurement APRIL Documents Community Interest ready for tium toactastheirr Approval Group Process

Team For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner IncinerationTechnologies required• StatutoryProcess (September2004) • for Traffic (April2004) • any other use.• sessions: topics wer monitoring atatime.Thefollowing specifically ononeaspectofbaseline wer incineration technologies.Thesessions p monitoring, aswellthestatutory various aspectsofthebaseline T rocesses surrounding theproject and hese InformationSessionsdealtwith

(November 2004) Health (February2004) Ecology (November2003) Air Quality(September2003) e facilitated andfocused e Of Advert Journal covered intheinformation er Autumn EU in ficial epr Prequalification 20+ Companies esentatives toselectaserviceprovider andestablishaPublic Community Report to itrSpringSumm Winter

CIG 4

Information

-

a

5 s

W

t

n h

involvement process todate. and informationaboutthepublic asked questionsaboutincineration the project asa whole,frequently management intheDublinRegion, provides informationonwaste The DublinWaste toEnergy website Website the area. management informationrelevant to on theproject, aswellotherwaste each informationsessionandupdates overview ofwhathashappenedat community. Theseprovide an developed anddistributedtothelocal A Newsletter

o C

Day

d o

aste

o

t r

number ofnewslettershavebeen

i

e

m

t

n

l

n

i

v

p

s

d

i

t

a

t

e

e

e

n

r

d

d

i

e s er Autumn Companies Submitted from Bids EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 Baseline Environmen Information Sessi Winter

Spring Summer Autumn ons S t W S N 7 THE NEXT STEP

An Bord Pleanála The Statutory Process Environmental Protection A planning application which includes Following the appointment of Elsam Agency (EPA) an EIS is submitted to An Bord to design, build and operate the Pleanála for certification. The Bord is proposed incinerator, the statutory an independent statutory body that phase can begin. There are three Even if Elsam obtain planning approval will assess the merits of the project separate bodies who must grant from An Bord Pleanála, the incinerator based on both planning and approval. They are: cannot operate without a licence from environmental criteria. The Bord the EPA. The EPA will invite invites members of the public to make An Bord Pleanála submissions from the public and may submissions, which may object to or The Environmental Protection also hold an oral hearing to inform the support the project. The Bord may Agency (EPA) decision making process. The licence hold an oral hearing to help it make will set emission limits for the plant its decision. The Commission for Energy and the EPA will ensure that these Regulation (CER) limits are not breached during the Commission for lifetime of the plant. Energy Regulation Environmental Impact Statement Needed

An incinerator needs to generate or supply energy to the national grid, Baseline monitoring has been ongoing and is being carried out to establish the with permission from the Commission existing state of the local environment. This monitoring is looking at existing for Energy Regulation. This is the third conditions for a number of parameters including air quality, noise levels, traffic and final independent body that must volumes and health. These monitoring programmes will be used as part of the grant approval before an incineration Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to assess, what potential impact the plant can be built. thermal treatment plant would have on the environment. An EIS is an evaluation of likely environmental impacts, positive and negative, and will consider the concerns of the community. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

We are here 2005 2006 2007 2008

EIS submmitted to An Bord Pleanala for Certification A Contract Preparation Processing of Earliest Point election Process Award of EIS EIS and Construction Licence Application can begin Licence Application submitted to EPA B ental Monitoring mmer Autumn Winter Spring Summer Autumn Winter Spring Summer Autumn Winter Spring Summer Autumn Winter

New Consultation Strategy

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 If you would like more information about any aspect of the Dublin Waste to Energy Project, why not contact:

Elizabeth Arnett, Local Communications Co-ordinator, Dublin City Council, Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 4.

Ph 01 2815918 Fax 01 6606921 Web www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie

Waste Management in Dublin

The four Local Authorities in the Dublin including more and enhanced procurement process to find the best Region have developed a plan that will recycling and composting facilities, possible service provider with the solve the waste issue in the region. an incineration/thermal treatment necessary expertise, experience and This plan aims to minimise waste plant and new landfill facilities. track record to design, build, operate production, maximise recycling, and finance the Dublin Waste to minimise landfill and produce energy A Feasibility and Siting study, which Energy Plant. This process concluded from waste. The targets of the plan are: looked at zoning and other planning with the Danish company Elsam criteria, was undertaken and this 59% recycling being appointed. Work on concluded that the preferred location construction cannot commence of 25% thermal treatment for the proposed incinerator is course unless/until such time as the 16% landfill. Poolbeg Peninsula. necessary planning/licence approvals have been obtained. The statutory Dublin City Council (on behalf of Implementing the Dublin Waste processes are described later in the the four local authorities in Dublin) Management Plan requires new brochure. facilities throughout the region undertook a comprehensive Waste Management in Denmark

Incineration with energy recovery targets for dealing with waste in In a similar manner to Dublin, the idea (power and heating) was introduced Denmark are broadly similar to those of source separation of waste is a key as a method of treating waste in for Ireland, with the current: element of the Danish model. Local Denmark in 1903. An integrated 66% recycling Authorities have collection systems system of waste management has For inspection purposes only. where the recyclable wastes are been in operation in Denmark for a Consent26% ofincineration copyright owner required for any other use. collected in separate bins/sacks from number of decades and incineration 8% landfill households and any leftover waste is forms a major part of this plan. The incinerated with energy recovery. Incineration in the Dublin Area

The Poolbeg Peninsula in Ringsend accept material that cannot be emissions from the plant in Dublin will is the preferred site for the proposed recycled and it will not accept be even lower than those currently incinerator in the Dublin Region. hazardous waste. specified in the Incineration Directive. It is planned that this plant will deal To date, Elsam has never been fined or with approximately 550,000 tonnes All plants designed and operated prosecuted for any breaches of of waste from the Dublin region and by Elsam are in line with the strictest emission limits. it will be built to cater for this. In line environmental standards in terms of with national policy, the plant will only emissions and it is planned that

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

Targets for Dublin

Landfill 16%

For inspection purposes only. Thermal Treatment 25% Consent59% of copyright ownerRec requiredycl foring any other use.

Landfill 16%

Thermal Treatment 25% 59% Recycling

www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie This project is being co-financed by the Cohesion Fund of the European Union EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

Waste in Dublin In Ireland, like the best waste management performers in Europe, we are implementing a fully integrated waste management system that emphasises waste prevention, maximises recycling, recovers energy from waste that cannot be recycled and minimises landfill. The options for dealing with our waste are described in the “waste hierarchy” - with those towards the top more desirable than those towards the bottom.

he Landfillfour Dublin Local16% Authorities have made a replacement Waste Management Plan for 2005 - 2010. The strategy calls for an integrated approach to waste Thermal Treatment 25% 59% Recycling T management, incorporating waste minimisation, maximum recycling, energy recovery from thermal treatment and minimum disposal to landfill.

The Plan continues to aim towards achieving: In a further effort to achieve these targets Landfill 16% the replacement plan proposes to:

• Increase staff in the Local Authorities to promote Thermal Treatment 25% 59% Recycling waste prevention • Collect additional materials in the green bin • Collect household organic waste in the new brown bin A lot of progress has been made since the first Waste Provide more Recycling Centres, which will accept Management Plan for Dublin was introduced. • bulky household waste, and Bring Centres Some of the main achievements include: For inspection purposes• only.Provide more drop off points for household garden waste Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. • Provision of a green bin service to 350,000 • Increase producer responsibility initiatives households, apartments and schools. • Increase commercial and industrial recycling • Reducing reliance on landfill from 90% in 1997 • Develop a landfill facility in Fingal to 74% in 2004. • Develop a biological waste treatment facility • Recycling of 30% of household, commercial in Dun Laoghaire Rathdown and industrial waste in 2003 compared • Develop an incinerator on the Poolbeg Peninsula to 7% in 1997. • Appointing 6 environmental awareness officers. • Selling 22,500 home composting bins. • Registering 313 schools in the Green Schools Programme and having 59 Green Flags awarded to schools in the region.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

What is being proposed?

Part of the implementation of the Waste Management Plan for Dublin includes the building of a thermal treatment plant to deal with 25% of Dublin's waste. The preferred site for this plant is on the Poolbeg Peninsula. The proposed thermal treatment plant is being developed in a Public Private Partnership (PPP) between Dublin City Council (acting on behalf of the four local authorities in Dublin) and Elsam, a Danish company.

Elsam is a Danish company with Statutory Process over 50 years experience as an Elsam are working with Dublin City energy provider and has been Council in preparing an Environmental at the forefront of developing Impact Statement (EIS) that will examine new generation waste to energy the potential impacts this plant may facilities in Denmark. This means have. Part of this involves a scoping exercise, which aims that all of their experience to identify the main issues that are likely to be important during For inspection purposesthe Environmental only. Impact Assessment. This EIS will form part in terms of incineration has been with the mostConsent modern of copyright owner required for any other use. of the application for Planning Approval to An Bord Pleanala up-to-date incineration technology. and the Waste Licence Application to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), two of the statutory processes that The proposed facility will cater for up to 600,000 tonnes of must be undertaken before the proposed facility can be built. household and commercial waste from the Dublin Region. This will consist of waste that is left over after segregation for recycling has taken place. Once the waste is burned in the THERE ARE THREE THINGS REQUIRED BY LAW, incinerator it will produce electricity and heat, which will be THAT MUST BE UNDERTAKEN BEFORE CONSTRUCTION/ fed into the national grid. The burning of 600,000 tonnes of OPERATION ON THE PLANT CAN BEGIN. THESE ARE: waste will produce enough electricity to service approximately 50,000 homes. 1 Application for planning consent to An Bord Pleanála to build the plant 2 Application to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for a licence to operate the plant 3 Application to the Commission for Energy Regulation (CER) for a licence to generate THE MAIN BENEFITS OF THERMAL TREATMENT ARE: and supply electricity • A reduction in the volume of waste going to landfill and consequent reductions in greenhouse gas emissions All three of these statutory processes must • The generation of electricity/provision of district heating be completed and approved before construction/ to service local homes and businesses operation of the proposed incinerator can begin. • Contribution towards the landfill diversion targets

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

PublicMENT involvement Ringsend Regional Office Open Days An information service was opened in Ringsend Regional Office Following on from the CIG report, the community expressed in 2001. The office has a full time staff including a senior official an interest to find out more about certain elements of the from Dublin City Council and an environmental scientist from the project. In response to this need, Dublin City Council decided Project Team. The information service is available to all members to hold a series of Information Sessions, to provide information about the baseline monitoring for the project and answer of the community and anyone is welcome to drop into the office any queries the public had about this. These information to discuss any aspect of the project. sessions were run from September 2003 to October 2005 Ringsend Regional Office, and covered the topics of: Cambridge House, Cambridge Road, • Air Quality • Ecology Ringsend, • Health • Traffic Dublin 2 • Statutory Process • Incineration Technology • Waste Management

1997 1998 1999 20002001 2002 2003 2004 2005 200620072008

April EIS submmitted to An Bord Advert Pleanala for Procurement Pre- 4-5 Comp in anies Bids Certification Processing Earliest Point Dublin Regional Dublin Regional Feasibility Procurement Appointment Procurement Documents Qualification shortlisted Contract Preparation Official Submitted of EIS and Construction Waste Waste and Siting of Clients of Project Team Developed ready for 20+ and invited Selection Process Award of EIS EU from Licence Application Management Management Studies Representatatives Approval Companies to t can begin Journal ender Companies Licence Strategy Plan for Dublin Application Waste to submitted Energy to EPA Project Baseline Environmental Monitoring For inspection purposes only. PROJECT DEVELOP Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Consultation for Consultation for Consultation Information Selection CIG Waste Dublin Regional Dublin Regional for Siting and Service CIG Community Interest Committee Report to Information Waste Waste Feasibility Opened in Appointed Group Process Information Sessions EIS Scoping Statutory Consultation Appointed Community Day Management Management Studies Ringsend Strategy Plan

Local Communications Project Co-ordinator Appointed Open Day

Community Interest Group (CIG) EIS Scoping The Community Interest Group (CIG) The Information Sessions also serve as part of the scoping process was established in 2001. The group for the EIS. These sessions invited members of the public to put was chosen to reflect the community, forward their issues and concerns to the project team so they identify issues of concern in the can be incorporated into the EIS. The first scoping session was community with regard to the held in November 2005 with two more scheduled (February proposed project, indicate questions and April 2006). thatVEMENT should be addressed in the EIS and prepare a report on the process for the community. A number of meetings were held with the CIG to discuss their issues and provide access to experts in various fields such as environmental law, planning, health effects of incineration etc. Following the CIG process, a report was produced, which highlighted the issues raised by the CIG and will feed into the EIS scoping.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

PUBLIC INVOL

Project Development Procurement Development The first Dublin Regional Waste Management Plan was published This was a long and complicated process, in 1998. This plan called for an integrated approach to waste which involved the following stages:

MENT management, which maximised recycling, minimised landfill and • Advertisement in the EU journal for ‘expressions allowed for incineration of non-recyclable goods. Following on of interest’ - this invited international consortia from this, a feasibility and siting study was completed, which with the relevant experience, to make submissions identified the Poolbeg Peninsula as the preferred site for the • Prequalification - this involved examination proposed incinerator. of submissions and shortlisting suitable candidates/ consortia with the financial and technical ability to Appointment of Project Team provide the facility. In 2001 Dublin City Council appointed a consortium to act as • Preparation of tender and contract documents – these their representatives to select a service provider and establish outline what the service provider is expected to provide and a Public Private Partnership to define the relationship between Dublin City Council and the design, build, operate and finance service provider. the plant. The consortium included • Invitation to tender - the shortlisted consortia were expertise in environmental science, given tender documents so they could prepare their bid waste management, procurement • Submission of bids - the project team evaluated and public involvement. each proposal and selected the best two consortia The procurement process ended with the selection of the Danish company Elsam.

1997 1998 1999 20002001 2002 2003 2004 2005 200620072008

April EIS submmitted to An Bord Advert Pleanala for Procurement Pre- 4-5 Comp in anies Bids Certification Processing Earliest Point Dublin Regional Dublin Regional Feasibility Procurement Appointment Procurement Documents Qualification shortlisted Contract Preparation Official Submitted of EIS and Construction Waste Waste and Siting of Clients of Project Team Developed ready for 20+ and invited Selection Process Award of EIS EU from Licence Application Management Management Studies Representatatives Approval Companies to t can begin Journal ender Companies Licence Strategy Plan for Dublin Application Waste to submitted Energy to EPA Project Baseline Environmental Monitoring For inspection purposes only. PROJECT DEVELOP Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Consultation for Consultation for Consultation Information Selection CIG Waste Dublin Regional Dublin Regional for Siting and Service CIG Community Interest Committee Report to Information Waste Waste Feasibility Opened in Appointed Group Process Information Sessions EIS Scoping Statutory Consultation Appointed Community Day Management Management Studies Ringsend Strategy Plan

Local Communications Project Co-ordinator Appointed Open Day

Statutory Processes Baseline Monitoring There are three statutory processes that must be undertaken Baseline monitoring has been carried out for the last number before construction on the proposed plant can begin. These are: of years to establish the existing state of the local environment. • Submission of EIS and planning application to An Bord A number of parameters have been monitored, including Pleanala for consent. The Bord is an independent statutory air quality, noise levels, traffic volumes and health. body that will assess the merits of the project based on both The baseline monitoring will form the basis of the EIS. planning and environmental criteria.

VEMENT • Submission to the EPA for a licence to operate the plant. If this licence is granted, the EPA can set emission limits for the plant and will ensure that these limits are not breached during the lifetime of the plant. • A thermal treatment plant produces heat and electricity, which can be supplied to the national grid. However, this cannot be done without permission from the Commission for Energy Regulation.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

PUBLIC INVOL

Dublin Waste to Energy incinerationProcess Anticipated process 1. Waste reception hall 16. Cooling system or potential district 2. Waste bunker building heating supply 3. Waste bunker 17. Flue gas cleaning building 4. Waste crane for feeding the boiler grate 18. Activated lime and carbon are added 25 5. Waste hopper to the flue gas to bind dioxins and other 2 7 6. Control room components to the fly ash 11 7. Boiler building 19. Fabric filter, where the fly ash is removed 8. Grate from the flue gas. 4 17 9. Boiler, where the heat energy is transferred 20. Fly ash for deposit 9 10 from the flue gas to the boiler water 21. Flue gas cooler 10. NOx - reduction by spraying ammonia 22. Two stage wet scrubber for reduction 5 6 water into the flue gas of HCI, SO2, HF and Hg emmissions 19 22 11. Boiler drum, where the water and steam 23. ID-fan are separated 24. Silencer 24 12. Turbine building 25. Stack 1 21 13. Steam turbine 26. Bottom ash for recycling 20 14. Generator, producing electricity 8 12 14 18 15. Condenser, where the remaining heat energy in the steam is cooled 13 15 23

3 26 16

1. Waste Reception Hall 26: Bottom Ash Collection The waste reception hall is designed to handle up to 50 waste The bottom ash is kept on site in a bunker until there is sufficient trucks per hour. There are 12 tipping bays, ample space for the quantity and then it is transported to quay side for shipping to waste trucks to manoeuvre and an area for inspection of the UK or the Continent for processing and eventual recycling for, incoming waste. The waste reception hall is kept under constant e.g. road construction. This solution has been chosen for two negative pressure to avoid the leaking of any odours to the reasons: a) presently there is no standards or regulations in For inspection purposes only. surroundings environs. Consent of copyright owner requiredIreland for any which other use.sets out a regime for bottom ash 2 & 3: Waste Bunker Building and Waste Bunker from waste incineration The waste bunker is designed to be large enough to ensure that to be recycled, and the incinerator has a continuous feed of fuel even though waste b) transport of the ash deliveries will be non continuous. Waste will only be received in through the city is avoided. the opening hours as specified in the operational license from EPA, but incineration will take place 24 hours a day/365 days a year. 9: Boiler The hot gas from the 4 & 5: Waste Crane and Hopper incineration process is led through the boiler in four passes - Two waste cranes continuously mix the waste to a uniform three vertical and one horizontal. The boiler walls are lined consistency and feed the waste into the furnace inlet hopper. A with steel pipes and the heat energy from the gases turn the third crane is stand-by in case of maintenance or breakdown. water in the pipes into steam, which is subsequently fed to the From the hopper the waste is moved onto the grates at the steam turbine. required pace. 12, 13, 14, 15, & 16: 8: Grate Steam Turbine and Electricity Generator The Dublin facility will have two parallel independent incineration The steam turbine drives a generator producing electricity. lines. Each line has a capacity of 32 ton/hour, i.e. the capacity of Approximately 480,000 MWh will be fed to the National Grid the facility is 64 ton/hour. The actual incineration of the waste in a year. This amount of electricity is equal to the demand from takes place on the grates. The waste is continuously moved approximately 50,000 Dublin households. The plant will be forward at a controlled speed to ensure complete burnout. designed to allow for a future district-heating network, and The ashes are deposited into the bottom ash bunker. The grate is will have the potential for heating the housing and office water-cooled and the hot water from this cooling is collected and developments planned for the area. used to pre-heat the combustion air.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

Dublin Waste to Energy DublinAnticipated process Waste to Energy Anticipated process Dublin Waste to Energy Anticipated process 1. Waste reception hall 16. Cooling system or potential district 2. Waste bunker building heating supply 3. Waste bunker 17. Flue gas cleaning building 1. Waste reception hall 16. Cooling system or potential district 4. Waste crane for feeding the boiler grate 18. Activated lime and carbon are added 2. Waste bunker building heating supply 25 5. Waste hopper to the flue gas to bind dioxins and other 2 3. Waste bunker 17. Flue gas cleaning building 7 6. Control room compon4. Wasentste to crane the flyfor ash feeding the boiler grate 18. Activated lime and carbon are added 11 25 7. Boiler building 19. Fabric5. filter,Was tewh hopperere the fly ash is removed to the flue gas to bind dioxins and other 2 8. Grate from the flue gas. 4 17 7 6. Control room components to the fly ash 11 9. Boiler, where the heat energy is transferred 20. Fly 7.ash forBoil deerposit building 19. Fabric filter, where the fly ash is removed 9 8. Grate from the flue gas. 10 4 17 from the flue gas to the boiler water 21. Flue gas cooler 10. NOx - reduction by spraying ammonia 22. Two9. sta geBoil weter, wh screreubber the heatfor r eductioenergy isn transferred 20. Fly ash for deposit 5 9 10 water into the flue gas of HCI, SfrO2,om HFthe aflunde Hggas etomm theissions boiler water 21. Flue gas cooler 6 10. NOx - reduction by spraying ammonia 22. Two stage wet scrubber for reduction 195 22 11. Boiler drum, where the water and steam 23. ID-fan 6 are separated 24. Sile ncer water into the flue gas of HCI, SO2, HF and Hg emmissions 19 22 12. Turbine building 25. Stack11. Boiler drum, where the water and steam 23. ID-fan 24 are separated 24. Silencer 1 13. Steam turbine 26. Bottom ash for recycling 21 24 12. Turbine building 25. Stack 1 20 14. Generator, producing electricity 13. Steam turbine 26. Bottom ash for recycling 8 12 14 21 15. Condenser, where the remaining heat 18 20 14. Generator, producing electricity 8 12 14 18 energy in the steam is cooled 15. Condenser, where the remaining heat 13 15 23 energy in the steam is cooled 13 15 23 3 26 3 16 26 16

10, 17, 18, 19 & 22: Flue Gas Cleaning 20: Fly Ash Collection After releasing their heat, the flue gases passes through a series The fly ash and the flue gas cleaning residues are toxic and must of cleaning processes, which will reduce the stack emissions to be managed as hazardous waste. From the Dublin facility it is the level specified by the Irish Environmental Protection Agency - planned to ship these substances for treatment and safe guided by the EU Waste Incineration Directive. The various depositing in licensed facilities in Norway or Germany.

processes and systems reduce dust particles, NOx, heavy metals,For inspection purposes only. dioxins & furans, hydrogen chloride, sulphur-dioxideConsent (SO2), of copyright CO owner25: required Stack for any other use.

and hydro fluorides, to the levels for which the plant is licensed. The stack is designed with an architectural height of 100 m. This Ammonia is sprayed into the boiler to reduce NOx, activated will eventually be validated and confirmed by the air dispersion modelling, carried out as an integral part of the Environmental carbon to bind dioxins & furans and mercury and lime to Impact Assessment for the facility. Emissions will meet the reduce HCl and SO2 are injected into the gas stream and are requirements of the license and the EU-Directive, and the subsequently retained in bag filters. A final scrubbing with licensing authority will specify a monitoring programme, with water and NaOH takes out the remaining HCl, SO2 and HF. which the facility must be in strict compliance.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

What happens Next?

The project will soon be entering the statutory process Oral Hearing This involves: • Any party to an appeal can request An Bord Pleanála to hold an oral hearing • Application to An Bord Pleanála for planning consent • Application to the EPA for a waste licence • Both the applicant and those who have made • Application to CER for a licence to generate submissions/observations are given the chance to put and supply electricity their case before the Board and the inspector who has been in charge makes a recommendation to the These processes provide lots of opportunities for members of the members of An Bord Pleanála public to get involved and have their say about the project. • It is important to note that the members do not have How can I get involved in these processes? to agree with the recommendations of the inspector Submission/Observation • The EPA may also decide to hold an oral hearing. • Dublin City Council must give notice through advertisements All those who have made submissions and the applicant in the national papers that an application for approval has will be notified of the date and time of the oral hearing, been submitted to An Bord Pleanála. at which all parties will be heard. A report of the oral hearing is prepared, and the Board of the EPA • Members of the public are then entitled to make will consider this report, as well as any objections a submission/observation on the application. and submissions, when making its decision. • All submissions/observations must be made in writing to An Bord Pleanála and must relate to planning issues. Judicial Review • Submissions can also be made to the EPA with regard • A judicial review is a process, which allows the courts to the waste licence application. Details of the to review the process whereby a public body application can be obtained by contacting the EPA (such as An Bord Pleanála) makes/reaches its decisions. Headquarters in Wexford. • The focus of a judicial review is on the decision making • Once the submissions have been received, the EPA will process rather than on the actual decision itself. For inspection purposes only. make a 'draft decision' and will issue it toConsent the applicant, of copyright owner required• forAn any application other use. for a judicial review of the decision

those who made submissions and put it on the website. of An Board Pleanála must be made within This gives the applicant or any other person a period of 8 weeks an opportunity to make an objection on the 'draft decision', again within a specified time frame.

North Wall

Dublin Harbour

Ringsend Park Ringsend

Sean Moore Irishtown Park Park Irishtown Proposed Incinerator Site

Ballsbridge Sandymount N

www.dublinwastetoenergy.ie This project is being co-financed by the Cohesion Fund of the European Union EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

If you have any issues or concerns you would like to form part of the EIS please fill out below:

Post to: Ringsend Regional Office, Cambridge House, Cambridge Road, Ringsend, Dublin 2

FRONT OF TEAR OFF

Draft Table of Contents for the EIS - Non Technical Summary

1. Executive Summary 9. Noise and Vibration 16. Archaeology, Architectural 2. Preamble 10. Residues and use of Materials and Cultural Heritage 3. Need for the project 11. Soils, Geology and Groundwater 17. Economic Assets of Human Origin 4. Site Selection 12. Water 18. Construction and Decommissioning Activities 5. Proposed Development 13. Human For inspectionBeings purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. 19. Sustainability 6. Landscape and Visual Impact 14. Terrestrial Ecology 20. Cumulative Impacts 7. Traffic 15. Estuarine Ecology and Interactions 8. Air Quality and Climate

BACK OF TEAR OFF

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 Record of findings of the Ringsend CIG prepared by Mercator Marketing Research on behalf of Ringsend CIG October 2002 (Final Draft)

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 1

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:04 Contents

Introduction 4

Part One

Background to Dublin Waste Management Plan 6 The Ringsend Community Interest Group 10 • Recruiting CIG Members 10 • The CIG Remit 12 • Meetings and Resignations 13 Public Consultation 14 Proposed Outcomes of the CIG Process 16 Feeding into Scoping 17 CIG Meetings 20 The CIG Process - Some Important Issues 22 • A PR exercise? 22 • Community Misinterpretation 23 • Group Dynamics 25 • Information and Deadlines For inspection purposes only. 26 Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Site Visits 29 Experts and Resources 31

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 2

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Part Two

Gathering Information 34 Siting and Proposed Technology 35 • The ‘Preferred’ Site 35 • The Need for Thermal Treatment 38 The Scale of Proposed Thermal Treatment Plant 41 Health 44 Traffic 46 The Environment 47 Regulation 49 The Views of the Experts 50 • Dr. Jim Wilson 50 • Karin Dubsky 51 • Professor Yvonne Scannell 52 • Conor Skehan 53 • Martin Hederman-Robinson 54 • Frank McDonald 55 • Dr. Hendrik Van der Kamp 56 • Dr. Dieter Schrenk For inspection purposes only. 57 Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. • Dr. Paul Johnston 58 • Dr. Andrew Farmer 59 • Owen Madden & Donal Mathews 60 • Dennis Fitzgerald 61 Summary and Conclusions 62 Appendix One 66 Appendix Two 67 Appendix Three 71

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 3

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Introduction

This document is a record of the findings of a Community Interest Group (CIG) set up in the Ringsend, Irishtown and Sandymount area in order to discuss plans for, and uncover information regarding, a thermal treatment plant on the Poolbeg Peninsula.

It was decided by CIG that this record should be compiled by an independent researcher, in order to best collate and compile the available information in a way that would be relevant and meaningful to the group themselves, and to the wider community in the areas mentioned.

The information contained within this document was gathered by means of speaking to members of the CIG, either in group discussions, or on an individual basis. Transcripts of previous CIG meetings were also available, as was other information concerning the CIG process and the planning stages for a thermal treatment plant at Poolbeg.

There are two parts to this document, reflecting the different attitudes to the issues that were uncovered in the course of conversations with the group. The first section details the CIG process itself, and reactions from within the group to the way this process progressed over a period of months. The second section details the issues of importance that were identified by some CIG members when considering For the inspection impact purposes a thermal only. treatment plant would have on the Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Ringsend, Irishtown and Sandymount area. However, the preference epxressed by most members of the group is that these concerns be spoken of only in very general terms, to avoid the risk of feeding into a scoping document.

There are concerns over the best way, if any, to present this information to a wider audience, which will be detailed at a subsequent stage in this document. The two-section structure serves as a means of facilitating the different views that are contained within the CIG, and of recording these views, even if the group ultimately decide that they do not wish this document to be used in its entirety.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 4

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Part One

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 5

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Background to Dublin Regional Waste Management Plan

This brief and introductory summary presents the perspective on Dublin Waste Management issues held by Dublin City Council and Engineering Consultants, M.C. O’Sullivan. As will become clear in subsequent sections of the report, the Community Interest Group (CIG) have a number of objections to various aspects of the Dublin Waste Management Plan, but the overall intention of Dublin City Council and M.C. O’Sullivan is presented here in order to supply some background information for those who were not able to be part of the CIG process.

In 1998 Dublin City Council passed the Dublin Waste Management Plan, which detailed future plans for dealing with Dublin’s waste, of which household waste constitutes only 15% of the total. As of 1998 almost 90% of Dublin’s waste is disposed of in landfill sites, with only 10% of the waste being properly recycled. EU directives have been put in place which require the amount of waste sent to landfill in member states to be reduced - particularly biodegradable waste. The EU directives also require future landfill sites to be more carefully regulated than is currently the case.

One of the primary objectives of the Dublin Waste Management Plan is to address this issue by ensuring that in future 60% of Dublin’s For inspection waste purposes only.will be recycled (which includes a large Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. proportion of construction waste as well as ordinary municipal waste), 25% will be dealt with in such a manner as to recover energy from the waste, and only the remaining 15% will be disposed of in landfill. It is the 25% segment of the waste, proposed for a waste to energy process, that is the main concern of this document. These figures come from the Waste Management Plan itself, as drawn up by Dublin City Council, and it should be noted at this point that the CIG have reservations as to whether these are credible or helpful statistics to use. The CIG also believe that the implementation of the Plan in its current form will mean that ordinary householders will be required to subsidise the costs of having commercial waste dealt with. The waste being spoken of will be derived from the entire Dublin region, from Dun Laoire and Rathdown County Council, Fingal County Council, South Dublin County Council and Dublin City Council.

Dublin City Council and M.C. O’Sullivan claim that in order to dispose of 25% of Dublin’s waste in such a way as to obtain energy from the process, a different form of waste treatment

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 6

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 needs to be introduced in the Dublin region. The best way of managing the waste to energy process, as identified by these parties, is to install some kind of thermal treatment plant in the Dublin area. This will allow the waste to be disposed of through incineration, but a by- product of this disposal process will be energy which can then be used for a variety of other purposes. Other by-products include residual bottom ash (approximately 25% by weight of the original waste), and the more toxic fly ash (approximately 5% by weight of the original waste), and air emissions. The fly ash contains high levels of dioxins, which are highly toxic. The CIG would like it to be made clear that they do not accept that this is in fact a viable waste to energy process, as the amount of energy produced is very low. They consider it instead to be a mass-burn incineration process.

The Dublin Regional Waste Management Plan is open to be reviewed in December 2002, and there is a possibility that some ammendments can be made arising out of such a review.

According to Dublin City Council, a siting and feasibility study was conducted in 1999, in order to discover the best technique to adopt for the waste to energy project, and to discover a preferred site for this waste treatment process to take place in. Four sites were identified as having the potential to encompass a waste to energy plant, and out of this study, the Poolbeg Peninsula was identified as being the preferred site. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Before a thermal treatment plant can be constructed on the Poolbeg site, however, there is a formal and legal planning stage to be gone through. During this stage, Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) must be carried out in order to examine the impact such a plant will have on the surrounding area. If the impact is considered to be overly detrimental to the area, it may be that the site ceases to be considered as a preferred site, and permission to proceed may be withheld on this account.

A formal application for planning permission to build a thermal treatment plant must also be presented, as must a formal application for a waste license. During this stage of the process therefore - the statutory stage - there are a number of opportunities for people to legally object to the construction or operation of a thermal treatment plant in the Ringsend area. A summary of the statutory process and the possibilities for public involvement follows.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 7

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 There are four separate legal applications that need to be successful before the way is clear for construction of a waste to energy facility to proceed. All of these applications will be processed in 2004, but more exact timescales are not available as yet. The following stages have been identified by Dublin City Council;

1.Planning permission is required from An Bord Pleanala. As part of the application for this planning permission an EIS must be prepared. Local authorities must inform the public that the EIS is being prepared, and members of the public have at least six weeks, and possibly more, to view the EIS and make submissions on it. An Bord Pleanala then reviews the situation, and can either decide to grant planning permission, or can convene an oral hearing at which all interested parties can make their views known, with particular reference to planning concerns such as traffic and infrastructure. 2.A developer must apply to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for an Intergrated Pollution Control License. This application will require the developer to set out the details of emissions, discharges, controls, and operational conditions. He may also be required to apply for a Waste License from the EPA. The application must be accompanied by an EIS, and here again the public are free to make submissions. The EPA can also decide to convene an oral hearing for this stage of the process, at which

the public can also present For inspectiontheir purposesviews, only. especially relating to pollution or Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. environmental concerns. 3.The developer will also need to apply to the ESB for a license to generate electricity as part of the waste to energy process. Once again an EIS is required for this application, and the public will be able to make submissions. This license will only be sought once planning and waste license applications have been successful. 4.When land is placed under compulsory purchase order an oral hearing is convened for affected parties to make submissions. An Bord Pleanala cannot confirm the CPO until this oral hearing takes place, and objections or submissions of the directly affected parties - ie. the landowners - have been recorded and investigated. Also, in order to CPO land an EIS is sometimes required, and it has been confirmed that this will be necessary in the case of land that is placed under compulsory purchase order for the waste to energy facility at Poolbeg.

While the CPO is already underway, the remainder of the statutory, or legal, phase does not commence until the winter of 2003/2004. Prior to this we are in a non-statutory, or voluntary

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 8

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 stage. During this period, Dublin City Council - the local authority in charge of the project - are asking various companies to tender for the contract to build and operate a thermal treatment plant at Poolbeg. At the same time, they have given a group of independent volunteers a chance to discuss issues surrounding a thermal treatment plant, and to gather information that may help to prepare people for the statutory phase of the project further down the road. This group is the Community Interest Group (CIG) for the Ringsend, Irishtown and Sandymount areas.

This is the first time in Europe that a community interest group has been involved in this kind of project at such an early stage, and Dublin City Council are anxious to learn from this experience for any future projects. In the normal course of events, feedback from members of a community is not invited until the statutory stage of planning as outlined above, whereas the CIG have been involved much earlier on in the process. The intention of Dublin City Council is that the findings of the CIG might be used to inform a developer of local concerns, so that a developer can take these issues into account when preparing a planning application at a later stage.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 9

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 The Ringsend Community Interest Group

Recruiting CIG members:

Dublin City Council have convened a group of individual, voluntary members from the Ringsend and Sandymount area, and from other parts of Dublin, in order to discuss plans for a thermal treatment facility on the Poolbeg Peninsula. The principal aim of this process was to allow the group to gather information about thermal treatment, and about the impact a thermal treatment plant would have on the Ringsend, Irishtown and Sandymount areas. This information would then be fed back to the wider community, so that as many people as possible would have some knowledge about what was planned for their area, and how it might affect their lives. This in turn would help people to prepare for the statutory phase of the project outlined above, during which they could present legal objections to the proposed plant, if deemed necessary.

A public meeting was held at the Clanna Gael Fontenoy GAA club in 2001, informing attendees of what was planned for the Poolbeg Peninsula with regard to a thermal treatment plant. Application forms were distributed at this meeting, so that people could fill in these forms if they were interested in participating in a Community Interest Group to discuss the matter further. In addition to this, leaflet For inspection drops purposes were only. done to some homes in the area inviting Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. people to put their names forward for participation.

48 people returned these forms expressing an interest in participating in the CIG process. A selection committee was set up to identify a smaller group from this list of volunteers. The members of this selection committee were a local Garda officer, a local school principal, and Dr. Jim Wilson of Trinity College Dublin, whose area of expertise is Dublin Bay.

Efforts were made to select people who might have experience or expertise to offer in a variety of different areas, so that the group might have as wide a mix of participants as possible. Some were selected because of a background in the health services, since it was presumed that health would be an important issue that would arise for discussion. Some people were selected because they had a background in, or knowledge of, environmental issues, planning issues, or engineering issues. Others were selected because of their

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 10

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 participation in various community enterprises such as youth groups, sports clubs or residents’ groups.

It must be stressed at this point however, that no one on the CIG committee was selected in order to represent a particular group or club within the community. It was simply thought that experience in some of the areas outlined above might be useful when it came to uncovering information on different aspects of thermal treatment or its impact on the area.

Members of CIG are individuals drawn from within the community, but they do not represent the community. They may be well placed to discuss or understand some of the issues that are of importance within the area, but have never claimed or wanted to be considered representatives of any group or segment of the Ringsend, or any other, community. Each member has served on the CIG committee as an individual, and any views expressed are individual views and opinions, and should not be taken as indicative of the views of any wider group or association.

In all, 18 people were invited to participate in the CIG process, with this number being considered the largest number that could work well together, but which also allowed different areas of experience to be included. Once this final group of people had been formed, the independent selection committee played For inspectionno further purposes role only. in the process. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 11

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 The CIG Remit:

Specific terms of reference for the CIG were defined at the beginning of the process, outlining the role of the group. These terms of reference can be summarised as follows:

The role of the CIG is; • To identify issues of concern regarding the proposal to build a Waste to Energy facility on the Poolbeg Peninsula • To assess the work that has been carried out by Dublin Corporation to determine the need for such a facility, and the action that has been taken to identify an appropriate site for such a facility • To discuss (with the help of experts who support or oppose the use of energy from waste as part of an integrated waste management strategy) the impact of similar facilities on local communities and on the health and safety of humans and the environment • To indicate the questions that would need to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement to respond to areas of community concern • To prepare a report on the Community Interest Group process for dissemination to the community and interested stakeholders For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 12

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Meetings and Resignations:

At the outset it was anticipated that the CIG would meet five times between October 2001 and February 2002. The first meeting was held on 9th October 2001 in the Ringsend Community Centre. However, the number of official meetings was extended to seven, and the CIG have also had a number of unofficial meetings themselves, thus extending the process to October 2002. It is estimated that the group has met between 20 and 30 times all told. This was deemed necessary because of the sheer weight of information involved in the process, and also due to requests for legal information on some areas. This will be discussed in greater detail at a later stage in this document.

As the process lengthened, a number of CIG members felt that they no longer wished to be involved for various reasons, and offered their resignation. In May 2002 the group were asked to consider whether they would like to ask new members to join the process in order to keep as close as possible to the original number of participants. One person availed of this opportunity. As of October 2002, therefore, there are 14 people still involved in the CIG process.

However, within this number there is a smaller core group of members who have attended most of the meetings and who have been For inspection most purposes heavily only. involved in all aspects of the process. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Others have attended fewer meetings, largely as a result of the extension of the project, which is seen by some as demanding too much in terms of time and commitment.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 13

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Public Consultation

It should be made very clear at the outset that the CIG members have grave reservations about this process being referred to as any kind of public consultation.

There are considerable fears that the authorities will treat this exercise as fulfilling their requirements to consult the public before granting a contract to develop and operate a thermal treatment plant on the Poolbeg Peninsula. The CIG would like it to be made clear that such an approach would be flawed and misleading.

In the first place, the number of people that have been involved in the CIG process is too small for the members to consider it proper consultation. While Dublin City Council or M.C. O’Sullivan may feel that they have consulted members of the public by means of this process, the group’s feeling is that it cannot be called proper public consultation when it is conducted on such a small scale.

In addition to this, the members of the CIG do not represent anyone else in the community except themselves. Dublin City Council therefore cannot say that they consulted representatives of a larger group, when everyone who has participated in the CIG process is adamant that they have done so on an Forindividual inspection purposes basis only. only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Finally, even leaving this points aside, members of the group are very clear that very little in the way of consultation actually went on in the course of CIG sessions. Instead, they were provided with an overload of technical information, and a series of complicated briefings, rather than a proper opportunity to debate the issues and offer meaningful feedback.

The CIG members would also like the wider community to be aware of what they feel were the flaws in the very first stages of research conducted in the community, which might be classified by the authorities as a form of consultation. In this early phase members of the public in the Ringsend and Irishtown areas were invited to participate in a door-to-door survey in which they were asked would they have a preference for a landfill site or a thermal treatment plant in their area. The CIG feel this was a very misleading approach, as it failed to inform the public of other waste disposal options, such as recycling, or waste reduction, and it failed to ask for their opinions on these options. The results of this survey should not be taken

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 14

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 to represent the definitive response of the community therefore, and Dublin City Council or M.C. O’Sullivan should not be able to claim at any stage that they completed full public consultation.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 15

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Proposed outcomes of the CIG Process

As mentioned above, the CIG committee was convened in order to gather information about thermal treatment in the Ringsend and surrounding areas, so that this information could be brought back to the wider community. The specific terms of reference are guidelines as to how this aim might be achieved. There are other proposed outcomes from the CIG process however.

If the CIG collects information that is used to inform the wider community, this will mean that the knowledge and experience they have gathered can be shared with community members who were not able to be part of this stage of the process. This will also mean that if local residents decide to lodge formal and legal objections to the planning and building of a thermal treatment plant in their area, they will be as well prepared as possible as a result of the CIG process.

Another proposed outcome of this process is that all the concerns of those who are members of CIG could be highlighted in the form of a scoping document for the attention of any developers who are tendering for the contract to build and operate a thermal treatment plant in Ringsend, and for the attention of the future EIA. This means that CIG has the opportunity to directly influence how the EIA is carried For inspection out, purposesand to only. ensure that local concerns are properly Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. addressed in the course of this survey. As is shown below, the CIG members have very strong views regarding this proposed outcome.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 16

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Feeding into Scoping

Prior to the formal Environmental Impact Assessment which is scheduled for 2004/2005, a preparatory document is to be drawn up, which is called the Scoping Document. This document identifies in broad terms the areas which an EIA should make sure to cover when assessing the effects a thermal treatment plant will have on the area. Everything that a scoping document contains must be properly addressed in the EIA or a developer will have failed to present a complete and proper plan, and can have his planning application declined on this account.

For this reason it was suggested that CIG might like to use the information they have gathered as part of this process in order to make sure that the scoping document contains all the areas and issues they have identified as being of concern to themselves. Since the CIG have worked very hard, and have uncovered a great number of issues requiring further attention, this would mean that the EIA would have to be extremely thorough in order to provide answers for all these questions and concerns, and that possibly it would fail to fully establish Poolbeg as the most suitable site for a thermal treatment plant.

There are a number of different opinions surrounding this issue, and some of these views have a bearing on the way in which the CIG For inspectioncommittee purposes hasonly. functioned. Dublin City Council and Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. others believe that it is very important that CIG make the most of this opportunity to help inform the scoping document, as it is a way of ‘marking the developer’s card’. While this stage of the process is purely voluntary, by taking the opportunity to feed into the statutory stage, CIG are completing valuable preparation for any legal objections they wish to make in the future. Dublin City Council would also see this as a way in which the CIG could ensure that if an incinerator does go ahead in their area, that it will be of the highest possible standards, as a result of all the questions raised by the group members.

There are a large number of members of the CIG committee who feel very strongly that this is not the way they wish to proceed. They are happy to compile a report detailing the process they have been involved in to date, and for this to be used to inform the wider community. However, there are substantial fears that by announcing areas that they wish to see addressed in an EIA this far in advance, they will actually be ‘showing their cards’, and even facilitating a developer. It may give a developer a chance to prepare ways of answering public concerns,

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 17

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 so that the EIA would not uncover any unduly negative impacts, thus allowing the development to proceed unhindered.

There is a worry therefore, that by outlining issues of importance for the area, such as traffic or health concerns, that CIG would in fact be ‘feeding’ into the scoping document, which many people are very wary of doing. There are even fears that the CIG report itself, although separate, will eventually be used to feed into a scoping document, and for this reason some members do not wish any issues surrounding thermal treatment itself to be covered in this report.

A related, but separate issue is the way in which some people believe that by feeding into the scoping document, CIG are actually doing a developer’s homework for them. Some members of the group believe that anyone who tenders for the development contract of a thermal treatment plant should be professional enough and expert enough to know what areas an EIA should target anyway. They should not need the help of local individuals, and there is some considerable resentment that CIG are being asked to perform such a task, which they do not believe should form part of their remit.

Another body of opinion within the group holds that it is not a problem to provide information for a scoping document. TheseFor inspection members purposes only. of CIG believe that it is important for as Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. many people as possible to be made aware of the possible effects of a thermal treatment plant being built and operating in their area. These people are anxious to make sure the issues are made known, and they do not believe that it helps a developer in any way. As one person put it, “how can you help them if you’re against it [thermal treatment plant]?” These people believe that being against the siting of a thermal treatment plant at Poolbeg is enough to counteract any perceived dangers of feeding into a scoping document. They can ensure that all the areas of concern are properly targeted in an EIA, at the same time as presenting as much information as possible to the wider public.

There were worries expressed that a failure on the part of CIG to issue a report that can be used for scoping and which details the concerns surrounding thermal treatment and its impact on the area, will lead developers and Dublin City Council officials to the mistaken belief that there must be no such concerns.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 18

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Some members of CIG believe that if they miss this opportunity to present their concerns, and the issues they would like to see addressed, that they might not have another opportunity, and that the construction of a thermal treatment plant might continue unopposed. There is very little clarity as to whether this is in fact the case or not, with some people believing that participation in this process means they are ruled out from making future objections, and others feeling the opposite. Attempts on the part of Dublin City Council to establish a clear position in this regard do not seem to have been successful.

In short, members of CIG would like it to be made clear that their participation in this process, and the production of a report, should not be used as a means of assisting the development of a thermal treatment plant in their area. Membership of the group should not be taken, either by Dublin City Council, or by Ringsend residents, to suggest that the CIG individuals are in favour of incineration. Nor should participation in the process prevent the CIG members from objecting to the proposed incinerator at another stage - either as a group, or on an individual basis.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 19

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 CIG Meetings

The CIG committee began meeting in October 2001. Each of the meetings was open to the public, and observers were welcome. The intention was that observers would not participate in the main body of the meeting, and that the floor would be opened to them towards the end of each meeting for comments and questions.

Members of Dublin City Council and of M.C. O’Sullivan were also present at these meetings, and each meeting was chaired by a facilitator who was provided by the project team. The CIG committee, however, felt the need for extra meetings among themselves in order to discuss possible directions for the group to take, and Dublin City Council or M.C. O’Sullivan were not at these extra sessions. At no stage however, did CIG wish these meetings to be considered ‘closed’. They were simply an opportunity to meet independently, and the public were always welcome to attend.

One of the problems identified by CIG was that public attendance at any of their meetings was very poor. This was attributed to a lack of publicity on the subject. It was felt that meetings were not advertised in advance, and that there was very little public knowledge about what was going on. Extra resources to publicise CIG meetings would have been appreciated. As it is, the lack of public For inspection attendance purposes only. has meant that the motives of CIG Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. members have been misinterpreted on occasion, and that the public have not arrived at a full understanding of what the process has been about. The dissemination of this document is intended in some part to address this problem.

It was also hoped that various local representatives, councillors and TDs would attend the CIG meetings, as their presence and assistance would have been greatly beneficial to the CIG members. However, the group feel that these people were never properly notified about the meetings, and never properly invited to them, and a result they very rarely turned up in the numbers that they should have. This meant that the CIG felt a lack of support, and they believe that Dublin City Council should have been more diligent in notifying councillors and politicians about the meetings.

When some city councillors were able to attend, often having heard about the meetings by accident, the CIG felt that there was a sense of division between these councillors and other

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 20

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 members of Dublin City Council, especially the City Manager and his Assistant Manager. On many occasions councillors addressed the meetings in order to claim that they had a different understanding of circumstances surrounding the implementation of the Waste Treatment Plan to the City Manager, leaving CIG members confused as to where the truth lay. There were complaints that in fact councillors used the CIG meetings as an opportunity to score points off one another or the City Manager, and as such were of little use to the group.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 21

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 The CIG Process - Some Important Issues

Throughout the compilation of this document, a number of issues arose that pointed to a feeling of frustration and helplessness on the part of the CIG members. It is important to detail some of the reasons for this frustration at this point.

A PR Exercise?

There is a strong feeling within the CIG, articulated by a number of people, that this process is simply a public relations exercise. This view is fostered by some of the contributions of Dublin City Council officials to the meetings. Members of CIG feel that it was very difficult to obtain clear answers to their questions from some of these officials. This leads them to the belief that most of the decisions about a thermal treatment plant at Poolbeg have already been made, and that this exercise is simply a token gesture towards consultation.

On some occasions the CIG have felt that they are wasting their time, especially when they hear that the City Manager has the ultimate decision-making powers in this situation. They wonder what is the point of engaging in a consultation exercise if the results of their deliberations do not go towards influencing a final decision. The sense that they are not being listened to is particularly disheartening For given inspection the purposes amount only. of time and effort they have put into Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. the process, and the fact that the commitment has turned out to be more lengthy than they had originally expected.

There are substantial fears that this process is being taken by officials to represent the public consultation they are required to undertake before proceeding with the development of a thermal treatment plant. Members of CIG however, feel that their small, information- gathering group, should not be taken as a consultation group since they do not represent the community, and have no mandate from this community. A series of meetings with 18 people should in no way be seen by authorities as a substitute for full public consultation with residents and community members. However, there is little optimism at the moment that proper consultation will be undertaken, leaving the members of the CIG feeling that they are simply pawns on a larger chess board.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 22

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Community Misinterpretation:

There are also concerns that the motives of the CIG committee have been misinterpreted by some members within the wider community. There is a mistaken belief held by some that participation in the CIG process is tantamount to agreement with a proposed thermal treatment plant. This was the reason for the resignation of some of the members, who were under the impression that they would not be able to present legal objections to thermal treatment at a later date if they were seen to have participated in this process. The result of these resignations is that some people believe the remaining CIG members to be in favour of thermal treatment, when almost completely the opposite is the case.

Many of those on the CIG committee are completely against the idea of thermal treatment, and have participated in the process as a way of finding out information that will strengthen their argument. Others began the process with a more open mind on the issue, but their experiences to date, and their inability to feel they are achieving something worthwhile in the face of bureaucracy, has meant that they are now very unlikely to approve of thermal treatment. Many feel that thermal treatment in any area in Dublin is wrong, and that there are alternatives which have not even been investigated, such as the New Zealand model (“Zero Waste”), and that Dublin City Council has not demonstrated that there is any ‘need’ for thermal treatment in the first place. While For inspection a smaller purposes only.number of people in the group may have Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. no objections to the principle of incineration, they too have been disillusioned by the failure on the part of the authorities to show that all the options for waste disposal have been properly explored.

It is very frustrating therefore, for the CIG members to hear that they are considered by outsiders to be furthering the cause of incineration, and to be helping to speed up the process whereby a thermal treatment plant is installed on the Poolbeg peninsula. In fact they feel they have done everything in their power to have the issue re-examined, and to have the process slowed down, but that their efforts have gone unnoticed or unappreciated by others in the community.

All of this has made it very difficult on occasion for the CIG members to retain any enthusiasm for their role. Instead, there has been a growing feeling of frustration that, not only are their motives misunderstood by their fellow residents, but also that they are unlikely

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 23

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 to get anywhere with the authorities they are dealing with. For some people this sense of frustration, combined with the length of time the process was taking, led to a desire to resign or withdraw from the process.

The resignations have meant that numbers in the CIG committee are somewhat depleted. Those who have resigned are missed by those who remain. One important reason for this is the fact that many of them would have been particularly well informed about thermal treatment and related issues. These were people who were able to ask the authorities “hard questions”, and to put them under some kind of pressure. While some of those who resigned did so out of a belief that the CIG was not the forum to ask their questions, their departure has left the remaining members feeling even more burdened: “We stayed on to ask the hard questions, but we’re not getting any answers.”

As mentioned already, there have also been misunderstandings surrounding the role of the CIG members, who are adamant that they do not represent any branch or segment of the Ringsend community. However, there is a belief that they are still seen in some quarters as speaking for the groups or organisations to which they are affiliated. The CIG would like it to be made clear that this is most definitely not the case, and that they have participated in the process simply as individuals with an Forinterest inspection in purposes the issues.only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 24

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Group Dynamics:

There are also some feelings of frustration around the whole issue of group dynamics. It has taken considerable time for the group to ‘gel’ or to learn to act as a cohesive unit, leaving many people feeling that the process did not really get off the ground until a number of meetings had elapsed. In some cases there is a belief that the CIG members still have marked differences of opinion or agenda that has meant that even now, they are not functioning as effectively as they might.

The selection process used to identify the CIG members has already been outlined. However, the perception of many of those within the group is that reality was quite different. Some people feel they were invited to participate with only a phone-call, others were invited or nominated in lieu of other community members who were unable to participate. There are stories of some people being approached in person to be invited to join the CIG, while others did apply to participate by filling out a formal application form. Even where people did fill out one of these forms, some were unaware of what they were applying for, and few were prepared for the length of the commitment involved. Of the 13 remaining members of the CIG, very few have the same story about how they started out on the group in the first place, in spite of the actions of the independent selection committee. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. These differing experiences about how various people came to participate in the CIG process have led to some difficulties with regard to group cohesion. Some people feel more like outsiders than others, often due to the fact that they live further away from the community, or to the fact that they are perceived to have personal agendas not shared by the other members. While most of these difficulties have receded as the process progressed, the initial meetings did not always run smoothly. This is combined with usual group dynamic issues of some people being more dominant than others, and some members having a higher level of technical knowledge than others, which could on occasion lead to feelings of frustration.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 25

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Information and Deadlines:

There are also outside factors to take into account when discussing the way in which the group functioned. In the first place the time given over to the entire CIG process was seen as far too short to accomplish all that was set out in the beginning. The CIG were required to assimilate a vast amount of information, and they were given very little time or support to allow them to accomplish this satisfactorily. For this reason five meetings extended to seven, extra meetings in between the official sessions were introduced, and the overall process is still underway in October 2002, well past an original deadline of April 2002. The short extent of the original timetable is seen as yet another indication that Dublin City Council are treating this as a token gesture of consultation, since they were seen to make it extremely difficult for the group to achieve their aims.

In addition to this, the information supplied to the group was both too detailed and too extensive to be of much use. Most people felt they would have needed technical expertise to decode some of the information they were given, and it required substantial commitment with regard to time in order to simply read through it all. Dublin City Council have agreed that their approach was misguided in this regard, but the effect has been to make many members of the CIG feel either alienated or patronised. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Even the experts who were invited to speak at some of the meetings were inclined to be too technical, and often presented contradictory viewpoints, which made it difficult for the CIG to properly assess what they were being told. The general feeling is that too much information, or information that is not easily accessible, is worse than no information at all. For this reason, many of the meetings felt more like briefing sessions than meetings for consultation, another reason for the CIG request to extend the process, so that the group could have some opportunity to discuss the implications of all that they had heard.

Once again, this has left CIG members feeling disenfranchised by city officials, and it has added weight to their suspicions that this exercise has not been taken seriously by the authorities. CIG believe that a number of barriers were deliberately placed in their way throughout this process, and that each hurdle has required considerable energy to get over, before the group could go back to their original task of gathering information of relevance to their community.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 26

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05

The amount of information involved meant that CIG meetings had to cover a lot of ground. This often meant that the group felt pressured to address certain issues before they were ready, or before they had achieved satisfactory answers to previous questions and concerns. A number of people felt that the group did not have enough time to formulate a strategy or an ideal approach whereby the important issues could be decided on in advance of a meeting and then pursued during the meeting. This was one or the reasons for introducing extra meeting dates.

There were also concerns expressed that there was little time in the meetings given over to summing up what had been learned, or to identifying a group position to take to the next stage. In some cases this was due to time constraints, but there were also concerns that the wider agenda might have been dictated by those outside the group. As it was, the CIG group took a long time to begin functioning in an effective manner, whereby issues of importance were identified and pursued cohesively, and where individual agendas were left aside.

The concerns over tight deadlines have even extended to the production of the CIG report. Dublin City Council were anxious to have the report ready by the time developers were invited to tender for the contract to build and operate a thermal treatment plant in Ringsend. Dublin City Council claim that this Foris inspection so the purposes CIG only. can feel confident that any developer Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. appointed in the future will have a full appreciation of the concerns that those in the area are likely to raise. CIG members themselves, however, feel they do not want to to do so much background work on behalf of a developer of a project they do not support, and they are resentful of City Council’s attempts to hurry them through the process.

On a number of occasions the CIG have asked Dublin City Council to postpone the procurement process (whereby developers are invited to tender for the contract), so that the work done by City Council in assessing the need for thermal treatment, and in selecting Poolbeg as the preferred site, can be properly examined. Dublin City Council have proceeded according to their original timetable however, and while the CIG process has been extended, the timetable for the procurement of a developer has not. Once more, this compounds CIG feelings that the process they have been involved in is actually superfluous, and was never intended to make any difference to Dublin City Council’s plans.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 27

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 The CIG report has been compiled if a very short space of time. Indeed, most members of the group agree that the time allowed to them by Dublin City Council has been far too short to allow them to sum up all the issues of importance to them. For this reason they are resistant to attempts to get them to deliver it before they are ready, and have in fact decided to set their own timetable in this regard, with little further reference to the suggestions or requirements of Dublin City Council.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 28

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Site Visits

Throughout the CIG process, members of the group were given the opportunity to visit thermal treatment plants in other countries, in order to see how they operated, and how they were integrated with the surrounding areas. Most of the group opted not to avail of this opportunity.

For some, the burden of extra travel and time was not one they felt able to take on, and one which they were not prepared for when they began the process. But more seriously, the offering of these site visits was seen by some outside observers as an offer of free junkets for the CIG members. Since the CIG were giving up much of their personal time to participate in the process, this misinterpretation was particularly hurtful, and so many decided not to avail of the site trips for this reason.

Others in the group felt that journeying to see a thermal treatment plant elsewhere would be tantamount to agreeing to the option of incineration, and they did not wish to send this signal. Still others felt that it would not be a helpful exercise, since they would not be comparing like with like. While other countries might be able to demonstrate that thermal treatment works well and is not harmful to the local environment, there was a belief expressed that these countries have many more resources Forand inspection a much purposes better only. infrastructure than Ireland. A well Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. operated incinerator in Denmark or Austria is seen as no guarantee that similar standards would be attained in Ireland, and indeed there is considerable scepticism about the ability of the Irish authorities to enforce these standards.

Members of the group also wish to point out that the thermal treatment plants they were invited to visit were very dissimilar to the one being proposed for the Poolbeg peninsula. None of the plants identified were of a similarly large scale (over 700,000 tonnes), and many of them did not even treat the same kind of waste that would be treated in the proposed Dublin version. As already stated, they were also plants with a much higher degree of accessibility, and a better developed infrastructure.

The CIG also made requests to see how large-scale recycling plants worked in other countries, or how other forms of waste treatment were catered for. They feel however that no such facilities were included in the list of site visits that they were offered. This compounds

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 29

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 their view that they were being encouraged to accept incineration as the only option, and indeed as a done deal, throughout the process.

One member of the group did choose to go on a site visit, and went to a thermal treatment plant in London. The trip proved interesting, but there was a strong feeling from the rest of the group that the more difficult questions posed by the member were not answered, either by the operators of the plant, or by those monitoring its impact on the local area. Little reassurance resulted from this trip therefore.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 30

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Experts and Resources

In order to provide the CIG with as much information about thermal treatment as possible, Dublin City Council made resources available to recruit expert speakers on a variety of subjects. These experts ranged from those involved with environmental law to those whose area of expertise was air-born pollution or climate. The group in general appreciated the chance to be able to hear from these experts, and for the most part the feeling is that Dublin City Council personnel worked hard to source the visiting speakers, and to persuade them to attend. Most people agree that they learnt a lot from this experience.

As the process continued, it began to emerge that many people within the group wished for greater clarity as to how thermal treatment was decided on as the preferred method of waste disposal and how Poolbeg came to be the preferred site for this facility. The responses of Dublin City Council on these issues were seen as less than satisfactory by the CIG members. For this reason it was agreed that Dublin City Council would fund a legal team for the CIG so that a legal examination could be made of the process by which the proposal for a waste to energy facility was put into practice. This legal examination is now complete, and the findings of the team are available under separate cover.

Dublin City Council have also made funding For inspection available purposes only. to assist the CIG in compiling a report Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. of their process and of the information they have uncovered as part of the process - namely this document.

While Dublin City Council and in some cases M.C. O’Sullivan have made these funds available, the CIG feel that they were never in full control of the resources. They were not given funds to use as they saw fit, but instead had to apply for them each time they felt a need for a certain piece of information, or for a certain approach to be taken. There is also a sense that the group had to fight hard for these resources to be made available, making them feel that Dublin City Council were trying to create obstacles instead of helping them in their quest for information.

The CIG also feel that various conflicts of interest on the part of the facilitator and some of the expert speakers have been exposed throughout the process, and they would like to have seen these conflicts be declared at the outset. Some members of the group believe that a

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 31

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 number the speakers and the facilitator were not properly independent, and were instead more likely to promote the agenda of those who were paying for their services. As a result, the CIG members believe that many of these speakers were actually trying to get the group to accept the prospect of thermal treatment, instead of simply providing them with the required information. There are also those that feel that the opinions of city officials and of M.C. O’Sullivan were facilitated to a greater extent than their own discussions and debates within the course of the meetings.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 32

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Part Two

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 33

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:05 Gathering Information

Since one of the main aims of the CIG process was to uncover information that would be of importance to the Ringsend community when considering the impact a thermal treatment plant would have on their area, most of the meetings were directed towards gathering this information. This section of the document will compile the main issues that were uncovered in the course of the process, and it is for the CIG committee themselves to decide if they would like this information to contribute to a future scoping document, or whether they would simply like it to be recorded for the benefit of the wider community.

A variety of guest speakers were invited to attend CIG meetings, each with particular areas of expertise that would help inform the debate surrounding thermal treatment. Resources were made available from Dublin City Council to allow these experts to attend. The CIG group also met with the Dublin City Manager and his colleagues, in an effort to discover the background to the Waste Management Plan, and to the selection of Poolbeg as the preferred site for a thermal treatment plant.

The CIG would like to note that in some cases the expert speakers were not selected by themselves, but were instead brought forward by Dublin City Council or M.C. O’Sullivan, leading them to be sceptical about whether For inspection these purposes experts only. were truly unbiased, or even how Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. useful they might be for the purposes of the CIG. In one particular case, for example, the CIG feel they asked for someone with expert knowledge of the local climate, but that the speaker who was invited did not have this local knowledge. While he provided the group with interesting information, this lack of knowledge meant that some questions remained unanswered.

There follows a summary of the issues CIG consider most important when considering a proposed thermal treatment plant for their area.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 34

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Siting and Proposed Technology

The ‘Preferred’ Site:

From the beginning CIG were anxious to know what kind of thermal treatment plant was being proposed for their area, and also how Poolbeg Peninsula came to be the preferred site for such a plant. Members of CIG themselves have strong reservations about the suitability of this site, largely to do with the amount of heavy industry which is already in the area, and with the lack of a proper infrastructure to cater for increased traffic in the region.

It took a number of meetings before the actual site on the Poolbeg Peninsula was identified for people on a map. Dublin City Council maintained that the final site could not be designated until a developer had been chosen, and had submitted specific plans for the plant that would be built. CIG believe however, that in order for the site in question to be ‘preferred’, and in order for a compulsory purchase order to be made on surrounding land and buildings, Dublin City Council must have known exactly where the plant would be situated from much earlier on in the process. This could also indicate that the type of technology that would be used, and maybe even the developer itself, had also been decided and known to Dublin City Council at the same time as CIG was being told that this knowledge was not yet available. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

On a number of occasions the minutes and transcripts of the CIG meetings record city officials saying that the developer would be the one who made the final decision on the size and precise location of the site for the thermal treatment plant. This was the general response to questions on these issues. However, the fact that land in the area has already been placed under compulsory purchase order means that the CIG are now of the opinion that they were misled on each occasion this answer was given to them. Instead they feel that Dublin City Council and M.C. O’Sullivan always knew the exact site in question, and that attempts to claim that a developer would make this decision were deliberately misleading. Claims on the part of the authorities that the Poolbeg site was only a ‘preferred’ site, or one that was still under consideration are similarly misleading.

One of the reasons that was offered by authorities in the course of the process for the preference of the Poolbeg Peninsula for the site of the thermal treatment plant was that its

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 35

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 chimneys would not be too obtrusive among other plants and stacks that are already in the area. However, the CIG members have since discovered that numerous chimney stacks in a single area can impact on one another, having substantial implications for the dispersion of emissions and the build up of pollution.

This was discovered in the course of a talk given by a meteorologist, who pointed out that stacks in close proximity to each other could set up what is known as a ‘looping effect’ whereby the emissions actually move around in circles, or are dispersed towards the ground, instead of being dispersed higher up into the air. The meteorologist, Dennis Fitzgerald, pointed out that modelling studies would need to be conducted in order to predict this phenomenon properly. The Assistant City Manager claimed that these studies would be carried out as part of an EIA, but the CIG are of the opinion that the fact that this effect has not been studied before now, indicates that the selection of Poolbeg as the preferred site was not carried out properly, and instead was a quickly made decision to suit interested parties, rather than an effort to select the best possible site for a waste to energy facility.

Originally CIG were told that there were four possible sites for a thermal treatment plant in the Dublin area. They would like to have seen these other proposed sites or heard more about them, and spoken to any CIG committees that were in these areas, in order to compare notes and possibly draw up a strategy for waste For inspection disposal purposes that only. would suit all parties. However, they Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. have subsequently found out that there are no other CIG processes going on in Dublin, further indicating to them that other sites were not properly considered, and that the siting of a thermal treatment plant at Poolbeg was a forgone conclusion.

This perception of Dublin City Council and of other personnel involved in implementing the Waste Management Plan as being reluctant to answer questions or provide information, means that there is little inclination for CIG to give anyone the benefit of the doubt at this stage in the process. The feeling is that it took so long to get such basic information about what they were meant to be discussing because facts were deliberately being withheld from them, or the group as a whole was being misled.

This in turn has meant that many CIG members find themselves disillusioned with the process as a whole. They do not see any evidence that their views are being listened to, and believe

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 36

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 they are simply there to show onlookers that Dublin City Council have conducted consultation with members of the community.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 37

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 The Need for Thermal Treatment:

There was also considerable discussion during CIG meetings regarding the actual need for thermal treatment as a means of dealing with Dublin’s waste, with some members of the group believing that this had not been adequately demonstrated by Dublin City Council. There are those who would like to see the question of waste management for the Dublin area reopened, so that other methods of waste reduction and disposal could be explored.

The EU directive regarding waste management has instructed member states to reduce, reuse and recycle waste before options such as thermal treatment and landfill are explored. There are many within the CIG process who believe that not enough attention has been given to reducing, reusing or recycling waste until now, and that the response of the city officials is to try to kill all the birds with the single stone of thermal treatment. Some members of the group would like more information about how the need for thermal treatment was clearly established by Dublin City Council. It is something that was laid out in the original terms of reference for the group, but members do not feel that the issue has been properly addressed by the authorities.

Indeed the EU directive does not indicate that any country has to use thermal treatment as a waste disposal method, and simply includes For inspection it purposesas an only. option that may be considered only after Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. waste is reduced, reused or recycled. The CIG feel that they have been put under pressure to accept the option of incineration by authorities who claim that the EU is the driving force behind such a proposal. The CIG members would like it to be made clear that they believe that all attempts to advance proposals for thermal treatment are coming from the Irish authorities, and not from Europe, as they have been encouraged to think.

Claims that the waste to energy project will make energy available for a variety of uses such as home heating, are also seen as misleading, since there are already several electricity power stations on the Poolbeg peninsula that are producing heat as a by-product of their operation, and there is currently no market for this energy. The CIG find it difficult to believe therefore, that energy resulting from thermal treatment of waste at Poolbeg will suddenly be deemed necessary and important, and they are more inclined to interpret these claims as attempts on the part of the authorities to make the proposal seem more palatable.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 38

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 For all of these reasons there is considerable demand on the part of CIG for the debate surrounding waste management to be reopened. They would like to have further information about whether thermal treatment is really necessary, and whether other technologies or approaches might not be more successful in addressing Dublin’s waste problem. There are those in the group who emphatically believe that the need for thermal treatment in Ireland has not been adequately demonstrated, and they refuse to accept it as a proposal for the Dublin area.

As mentioned above, the CIG would also like to re-examine the way in which Poolbeg came to be the preferred site for a waste to energy facility for the enire Dublin region. Some councillors serving on Dublin City Council have indicated that they did not know what they were agreeing to when they voted for the Waste Management Plan in 1998, and so questions have been raised over the legality of the siting process, and whether the City Manager acted properly in this selection process. While Dublin City Council believe they have acted legally and correctly at all times, they have provided resources for the CIG to retain legal counsel in order to explore if this is in fact the case. The document detailing the findings of this legal study is available separately.

Some members of the CIG committee would like these issues to be addressed before proceeding any further. They would Forlike inspection the purposeswhole only. subject of the siting and feasibility of Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. thermal treatment in Dublin to be readdressed, and they would like the public to be aware that what they have learnt to date makes them believe that the waste management process as a whole has been seriously flawed. They do not feel there is much point in discussing other issues surrounding thermal treatment until clarification has been achieved in this regard, and there are serious objections to attempts to hurry them through a consultation process when all the information regarding the background to thermal treatment for Poolbeg is not available. In many ways it strikes people as being a backwards process, where “the cart has been put before the horse.”

Others within the group feel that decisions have already been made by Dublin City Council in relation to waste management, and a suggested thermal treatment plant for Poolbeg is one of these decisions. They would now like to make clear the dangers and risks involved in having such a plant in their area rather than to debate how the decisions were made in the first place,

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 39

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 since they feel it is unlikely that they will be able to alter these decisions. The concerns of this group are outlined in the following pages.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 40

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 The Scale of Proposed Thermal Treatment Plant

The thermal treatment plant proposed for the Poolbeg Peninsula is predicted to have a capacity of more than 700,000 tonnes of waste. This is something regarded very seriously by the CIG for a number of reasons.

In the first place, the size of this plant will mean that the emissions from its chimney stacks will be greater, as will the quantities of residual waste which will still have to be disposed of in some manner - such as toxic fly ash and bottom ash. A plant this size will also mean that the number of trucks required to transport waste to and from the facility will be greatly increased, with attendant congestion and pollution problems.

However there also concerns about the life-span of an incinerator built to this scale. Thermal treatment plants require a certain level of waste in order to function efficiently and safely. A decrease in the amount of waste being fed to an incinerator can mean that it ceases to operate at its optimum level, and emissions increase and become less safe. The CIG have heard of a number of plants in Europe that have had to close down because they no longer have enough waste coming in, and they are very concerned that Dublin does not seem to be learning from these lessons. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. If society’s attitude to waste management is revised - even to a limited extent - reducing, reusing and recycling waste will become much stronger options for waste disposal. This will reduce the amount of waste that needs to be disposed of by incineration, and the danger is that a 700,000 tonne facility might very quickly become out of date. There were some fears expressed that the authorities might even resort to importing waste from other countries in order to avoid this problem.

On a number of occasions the CIG have discussed alternative means of waste disposal, and one possibility that was raised by a few members was that a number of smaller waste facilities be constructed around the Dublin area. The advantages to this approach are that no one area is over burdened with such a facility, traffic is not congested around a single plant, and if Dublin manages to reduce its waste output, one of these smaller plants can be closed down without the same difficulties or cost implications of shutting down a larger one. In general, members of the CIG do not believe that the residents of Ringsend, Irishtown and Sandymount

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 41

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 should have to bear the brunt of the waste problem that is a matter for all of Dublin, and not just a localised problem.

Another means of waste disposal that was also raised by some CIG members is that of anaerobic digestion, which would also produce energy as part of the process, as well as rendering the waste biologically inert, under the terms of the EU landfill directive. However, the feeling is that the authorities have not explored this option properly, and have taken no steps to present it to the CIG as a viable alternative to thermal treatment.

There has also been much discussion of recycling in the course of the CIG meetings, and many members would like to see this option presented by Dublin City Council with more enthusiasm and more resources than has previously been the case. Information has been found detailing how other countries and cities have been successful in increasing their recycling rates, which both reduces the amount of waste going to landfill or being incinerated, but also provides employment. Dublin’s track record has been seen as very poor in this regard, but many CIG members believe that if a proper recycling infrastructure is put in place, residents in the Dublin area will be eager to take this opportunity to dispose of their waste more responsibly. As mentioned before, this approach could quite conceivably make the idea of a single large incinerator redundant. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. The CIG do not feel that any of these options for waste disposal have been adequately explored by Dublin City Council or by M.C. O’Sullivan, and they would like the whole question to be readdressed, along with other possible locations that could be considered as sites for smaller thermal treatment plants. The Poolbeg area is already seen as having more than its fair share of heavy industry and undesirable processes, and to situate a large incinerator for the whole of the Dublin area in this region is seen as one burden too many. This is all the more galling when such a facility would be expected to deal with waste from the entire Dublin region. The CIG members believe that the subject of waste disposal should be one that everyone in the Dublin area is concerned about, and not just those who may be in the immediate vicinity of an unwanted incinerator.

The fact that the authorities seem to be so set on Poolbeg as the preferred location for a thermal treatment plant, regardless of the opinions of locals, indicates to the CIG that what is at stake here is not the best means of waste disposal, or a way of safeguarding the

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 42

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 environment, but instead a series of financial and political agendas that have overridden the concerns of those who will actually be affected by such a plant.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 43

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Health

A number of CIG members have serious concerns about the impact a thermal treatment plant will have on the health of those living in the surrounding area. Residents of Ringsend and its environs are already seen as been heavily burdened with problems of ill-health, especially respiratory conditions such as asthma. This is due to high levels of traffic and of pollution from industries in the area. Siting a thermal treatment plant in Poolbeg will only exacerbate these problems.

The emissions from such a facility are seen as serious health risks by many people. The CIG do not feel that any of the information they have uncovered in the course of this process allays these fears. There is little inclination to trust officials to monitor or regulate the activities of an incinerator properly, and so claims that the emissions will be of safe levels are often dismissed.

These emissions will affect the air quality in the area, increasing respiratory ailments, and generally affecting the quality of life for local residents. However, many people believe that the emissions will also be discharged into Dublin Bay, which will have implications for the marine environment, and also for the food chain. For example, food grown within a 30 km radius of the plant will not be able to For be inspection described purposes only. as ‘organic’. Dioxins resulting from the Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. incineration process may also end up in the food chain, and CIG are not yet convinced that the levels will not be harmful. There are some concerns especially that dioxins might have a previously unresearched effect on unborn children.

Since the US EPA have said that there is no safe level of dioxin, and since dioxin accumulates in certain tissue, the CIG is concerned with the long-term effects of producing dioxins and other poisons, especially in such enormous quantities in the ash. The CIG believe that the EU permitted levels for emissions are not based on health research or epidemiological studies, but rather what is possible technologically.

All in all, while CIG have heard from some experts about the likely emissions from a waste to energy plant, they do not feel that what they have heard is either clear, or reassuring. In some cases the possible health impacts have not even been fully researched. CIG would like to

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 44

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 make sure that an EIA addresses the whole area of local health, and that the community are made aware of the health risks that may be part of siting thermal treatment in this area.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 45

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Traffic

The issue of traffic is one which many members of CIG feel particularly strongly about. Ringsend is already seen as having severe problems with regard to traffic congestion, especially since it is so close to Dublin’s port area. Heavy goods vehicles already use the narrow roads of Ringsend as their main route into the city, and this has been something that locals have been anxious about for quite some time.

A thermal treatment plant will merely serve to increase the traffic levels in this area to intolerable levels. People believe that there will be a constant stream of trucks into and out of the plant, which will cause congestion, but will also make the area increasingly dangerous from a road safety point of view.

In addition to this, greater numbers of trucks will increase the noise and the pollution levels in the area, and will therefore have a substantial impact on the quality of life in Ringsend and immediately surrounding areas. There is also the issue of the safety of the waste that these trucks will be carrying. People should be concerned about how it will be packaged and transported, and whether the methods used will be safe enough.

The CIG members do not feel that they For inspection have purposes heard only. anything that indicates that this traffic Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. problem can be avoided or managed effectively, and they are adamant that the infrastructure of the area is in no way capable of dealing with this extra burden.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 46

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 The Environment

While concerns about the CIG process and the siting of an incinerator are foremost, followed by concerns about health and traffic, there were a number of mentions of the environment and the impact a thermal treatment facility will have on this environment.

Dublin Bay is acknowledged as a special amenity area, and many people have already witnessed the long struggle to clean it up after inadequate sewage treatment facilities. To plan a thermal treatment plant for almost the same area is seen as short-sighted at best. The belief is that it is inevitable that some degree of environmental impact will be experienced as a result of thermal treatment, and people are concerned that a valuable amenity will be irreparably damaged.

The CIG believe that the air quality in the area will be diminished by the emissions of a thermal treatment plant, and also that residual waste will be discharged into the sea. This means that the quality of the water in Dublin Bay will be severely affected, which will have implications for bird, animal and marine life all along the coast, as well as disimproving the environment further for humans. Even the construction of such a plant will have implications for the environment, let alone its operation. While the Poolbeg Peninsula is already seen as particularly badly affected by industrial For inspectionplants purposesand their only. negative impacts on the environment, Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. the belief is that steps should be taken to improve this situation, rather than to further compound it with a thermal treatment plant.

Few reassuring answers have been given about how such a plant will affect the environment, with no plans available for the disposal of either bottom ash or toxic fly ash, and no credible procedures in place for the monitoring of emissions. The CIG do not believe that their questions have been properly answered in this regard, and they would like the community to be aware of the threat to their local environment.

There is also very little inclination to trust Irish authorities to make sure that environmental safeguards are put in place, or adhered to. If something goes wrong with a thermal treatment plant, the belief is that the damage to the surrounding environment will be irreparable, and at the moment there is little confidence in the authorities to make sure that such a catastrophe could not occur.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 47

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06

While the CIG did hear about the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and its monitoring duties aimed at guarding against threats to the environment, they have also heard stories that have led them to regard this monitoring as flawed. The CIG have heard that companies and plants are given advance warning of an EPA visit, and are therefore able to present a pristine operation to inspectors, when the daily reality might be something quite different.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 48

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Regulation

As mentioned earlier, there is considerable scepticism that Dublin City Council, or any other body of officials will be able to properly regulate any new thermal treatment plant on the Poolbeg Peninsula. This has much to do with the previous track record of such authorities, and with the recent scandals surrounding illegal dumps, and improperly regulated procedures. The CIG members do not believe that they have been convinced that things would be different this time around.

This scepticism has not been helped by the lack of transparency surrounding the siting of the proposed plant, and the decision regarding most suitable technology. Since the CIG have been unable to get clear answers as to how Poolbeg came to be the preferred site, or even as to whether incineration really is the necessary approach to waste management, they do not believe that monitoring or regulating procedures would be any more transparent or reliable. Quite a major public relations exercise would need to be undertaken in order to convince people that proper procedures would be in place.

In fact many people believe that Poolbeg has been deemed the preferred site for thermal treatment in order to allow the authorities to further cut corners. Some people cited the location of the sewage treatment plant For inspection adjacent purposes to only. the proposed thermal treatment plant, Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. suggesting that dried sewage might be used as fuel for the incinerator. A nearby scrap yard might enable industrial, chemical and illegal waste to be disposed of in this incinerator, while the coastal location might allow waste to be imported from other countries in order to enable the thermal treatment plant to operate at full capacity.

While these suggestions are merely theories at this stage, it is important for Dublin City Council to realise that an absence of transparency and a lack of straightforward information merely encourages the growth of this kind of speculation.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 49

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 The Views of the Experts

Resources were made available to allow the CIG to hear from a number of experts to address their meetings, outlining points of importance with regard to thermal treatment, and indicating areas that CIG should highlight if they decide to prepare for an EIA by contributing to a scoping document. A summary of the experts who spoke at CIG meetings, and of their main points follows. Full transcripts of their addresses to the CIG are available separately.

Dr. Jim Wilson:

Jim Wilson is a member of the lecturing staff at Trinity College Dublin, and his area of expertise is Dublin Bay. His presentation to the CIG identified a number of questions he would want answers to if he were involved in the process. He encouraged the CIG to consider four phases of the planned thermal treatment plant; construction, plant operation, associated activities, and decommissioning. For each of these stages, CIG would need to consider how the waste from a thermal treatment plant was being disposed of, and what effects this would have on the surrounding environment. Jim suggested that CIG ask where contaminants from the proposed plant would go, and whether they would pose risks to life- forms - either human or animal. Considering the fact that the thermal treatment plant would be built in a marine environment, CIG For would inspection purposesparticularly only. need to consider its effect on local Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. waters and on coastal areas.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 50

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Karin Dubsky:

Karin Dubsky is a member of Coastwatch Ireland, and she addressed the CIG on issues surrounding the siting of a proposed thermal treatment plant, and the need for incineration as a means of waste disposal. One key point identified by Karin is that a thermal treatment plant needs a certain volume of waste in order to function efficiently. If Dublin’s plans to increase the rate of recycling are successful, a large thermal treatment plant might quickly become redundant. There are facilities in Austria which are currently experiencing this problem. Karin therefore encouraged CIG to expand their remit so that they could look at other forms of waste management in conjunction with incineration, thereby establishing whether there is a real need for thermal treatment, and if so, how large the plant should really be.

Karin also suggested that the group explore proposals for disposing of ash from an incinerator, as some of this ash is highly toxic. There is also a need to have monitoring and compliance procedures clearly laid out so that there can be a bond of trust between Council officials and the community. CIG should also examine the impact on the environment of something going wrong with a proposed thermal treatment plant, and assess the ability of the authorities to inform and protect the public in such an event.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 51

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Professor Yvonne Scannell:

Yvonne Scannell is Professor of Law, Environmental Law and Policy at Trinity College, and her area of speciality is environmental law in Ireland and Europe. Yvonne pointed out that EU regulations require Ireland to reduce the amount of waste going to landfill by 75%. This is going to prove very difficult without introducing a waste to energy option such as thermal treatment. She pointed out a number of problems Irish society is facing at the moment with regard to waste management, citing difficulties with proper recycling as an example. She felt that some of the main areas to examine when considering the impact of thermal treatment on the Ringsend area would be traffic, pollution, disturbance to amenities and perhaps property values.

Since European standards regarding emissions from incinerators are already so high, Yvonne believes that it is unlikely that residents will be able to object to a thermal treatment plant on this front. Instead, they should focus on some of the traffic implications of having an incinerator in their area, and try to get as much covered in the EIA as possible - including possible effects on wildlife in the area. The fact that Dublin Bay is regarded as a Special Amenity Area will mean that a developer will have to be very careful not to impinge on the conservation area when he is submitting his plans. Yvonne also reminded the group that anyone can simply appeal against planning For inspection permission purposes only. or the granting of a waste license for Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. this facility, which gives Irish people considerably more scope for objection than their European counterparts, who would have to demonstrate their reasons for objecting.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 52

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Conor Skehan:

Conor Skehan’s area of expertise is in Environmental Impact Assessment. He specialises in the prediction and evaluation of the impacts of large scale projects. Conor advised the CIG that they would be unlikely to succeed in objecting to a thermal treatment plant on the grounds of dangerous emissions. Once such plants are run properly the levels of emissions are generally very safe, and so local residents would be wasting their time and energy in trying to stop an incinerator purely on that basis. Instead, Conor suggested that people concentrate on what they know best - their own local area and how a thermal treatment plant would be likely to affect it in terms of increased traffic, or how the local flora and fauna would be affected.

Conor also reassured the group that an EIA is extremely thorough, and that it is a developer’s own interests to comply properly with such a survey. The results of an EIA do not allow a developer to hide possibly negative impacts. There is also the Environmental Protection Agency which monitors the emissions from various industrial plants around the country, and if any of these emissions rise over the approved level, inspection teams are brought in.

Conor’s belief is that the local community will have very little success in trying to attack the proposed plant on grounds of emissions or environmental law. Instead their energies should be focused on possible impacts on the For inspectionimmediate purposes only.lives of locals. In this way, even if the Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. thermal treatment plant is not stopped, the process will have helped to ensure that the best possible facility has been obtained for the area, with the minimum disruption to people’s lives.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 53

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Martin Hederman-Robinson:

Martin is a lawyer in the EU Commission’s Unit for Sustainable Resources, Consumption and Waste. He attended the CIG meeting in lieu of Marianna Klingbiel, and under the instructions of the EU Commissioner for the Environment. Martin urged the CIG to remember that incineration was not the only alternative to landfill, or the only means of reducing the levels of waste going to landfill in this country. Other approaches such as composting and recycling should also be considered. He also pointed out that the EU has at no stage insisted that member states introduce thermal treatment as a means of reducing the amount of waste that goes to landfill.

One of the areas Martin identified as needing further exploration was what happened to the ash produced by an incinerator. He acknowledged that different EU countries had different guidelines with regard to this issue, but that some of the ash will be extremely dangerous. He also reminded the group that they have the right to ask questions of the Environment Commission, or to lobby them regarding a particular issue. While it may be a time consuming process, the powers of the EU Commission for the Environment should not be underestimated.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 54

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Frank McDonald:

Frank McDonal is the Environmental Editor of the Irish Times, and has a wide range of knowledge on planning and environmental issues. Frank reminded the group of Ireland’s poor performance to date with regard to waste management, and that it was a problem that needed to be faced by everyone, since everyone has a hand in producing this waste. He also encouraged the group to look further into how waste management directives would be enforced by local authorities, especially in the light of some recent scandals regarding illegal dumps.

Frank spoke of thermal treatment plants that work very well and safely in other European countries, but felt that the same level of confidence in the authorities does not exist in Irish society. One of the big issues to consider if a thermal treatment plant is put in the Ringsend area however, is that of increased traffic, and Frank did not see any easy way around this problem. He himself would be in favour of spreading facilities around Dublin, to avoid too much strain on the infrastructure of one particular area. He also reminded the group that the procurement process might establish other options for waste management that did not involve incineration on site, and that they were not to lose heart in the process they were involved in.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 55

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Dr. Hendrik Van Der Kamp:

Hendrik is Head of Planning and Development in DIT in Bolton Street, and is also a Senior Inspector with An Bord Pleanala. Hendrik addressed CIG meetings twice, and encouraged the group to consider where the benefits and the disadvantages of a thermal treatment plant might be felt. If an area or group of people are particularly disadvantaged by the construction and operation of an incinerator, some kind of compensation might be offered, but the CIG might want to consider if this is a sufficient or worthwhile approach.

Hendrik also spoke about the perception of a waste to energy facility. At the moment most of the emphasis is on the incineration side of things, but such a plant would also be able to supply energy, which might be regarded as a positive outcome.

Hendrik then took the group through various planning processes for a thermal treatment plant. He described the means by which different areas in Dublin had different zonings depending on the predominant land use in the area. Poolbeg may have been selected as a preferred site for thermal treatment because of its heavy industry zoning. Hendrik mentioned that perhaps a more appropriate assessment might have been to discover what areas in Dublin had a transport infrastructure capable of dealing with a thermal treatment plant, what area would make best use of waste heat, and other For similar inspection purposes factors. only. This might have identified a different Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. preferred site for the waste to energy facility. At the same time however, it may be that Poolbeg really is the best available site for this plant. But Hendrik pointed out that it is often helpful to take a step back from the process and to review what has happened to date, in order to arrive at a clearer understanding of the issues involved, and the issue of site selection may warrant inclusion in an EIA.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 56

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Dr. Dieter Schrenk:

Dr Schrenk is a consultant to the World Health Organisation and the German Federal Environmental Agency, and his area of expertise is that of food toxicology, and the toxicological aspect of thermal treatment technologies. Dieter told the group that all thermal treatment processes led to the release of dioxins, and that this included the roasting or baking of food! The important thing therefore, is to discover the extent of the dioxins that would be released by a thermal treatment plant, and whether these dioxins would be present in harmful amounts.

He provided the group with examples from incinerators throughout Europe, where strict regulations were enforced, and the dioxin levels and the levels of toxic emissions were very low. If a waste incinerator is properly managed, and if controls are properly enforced therefore, Dieter believes that there are no health risks for the surrounding community. He suggested that the group should be asking questions about the levels of emissions of the planned facility so that the impact on local health can be accurately assessed, and how the fly ash will be treated after incineration.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 57

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Dr. Paul Johnston:

Paul is the Principal Scientist at the Greenpeace International Research Laboratory in Exeter, and is particularly knowledgeable in the area of toxins in the environment. Paul pointed out that there is actually no comprehensive assembly of information about thermal waste treatment, and that while Greenpeace has tried to gather together an archive, much of the material relates to old technology. As a result there is little available information about more modern forms of technology, such as are being proposed for the Ringsend area.

Paul also spoke of how it was difficult to get proof regarding the health impacts of thermal treatment. There are no continuous monitoring procedures, so checks on dioxin levels or emission levels can only provide a snapshot of what is going on. It might therefore be possible to underestimate these levels. He suggested that CIG should be asking questions around this area. They should also consider the fact that society could be encouraged to move towards recycling and waste reduction, and that incineration might turn out to be unnecessary if this was achieved.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 58

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Dr. Andrew Farmer:

Andrew is a biologist at the Institute for European Environment Policy in London, and his area of expertise is that of pollution control policies and the impact of thermal treatment on air quality and health. Andrew pointed out to the group that there is limited monitoring of air quality in Dublin at the moment, but that they would need to consider the impact of increased traffic in the area, as well as the emissions from a thermal treatment plant. While new technology might mean that the levels of emissions are reduced and improved, the increased traffic in the area might actually counteract this improvement, and this is something the community would need to look into. They might also like to explore the progress of dioxins through the food chain, and Andrew pointed out that incinerators are not the only producers of dioxins and pollutants. There are already many facilities on the Poolbeg peninsula that might need to be examined in this light.

It is also important to assess where the impact of pollution will be most felt. Measuring the levels of emissions is not sufficient, as these will eventually be felt elsewhere other than at the top of the chimney. If the impact of these emissions is felt in areas of human exposure, this might be something to concern people, especially if there is a cumulative effect with traffic emissions, and emissions from other industries. However, in order to properly assess this cumulative effect, locals need to know For the inspection emission purposes only. levels that are already being experienced Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. in their area. The climate of the area would also have an impact on levels of pollution.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 59

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Owen Madden and Donal Mathews:

Owen and Donal are from the Transport and Environment Department of Dublin City Council, and are traffic engineers with responsibility for traffic in Dublin, and for predicting and managing traffic increases in the city. Owen deals with traffic for the city in general, while Donal has particular responsibility for traffic in the south east of the city, and therefore for the Ringsend area.

They told the CIG about how they would examine the traffic implications of any planning application for a thermal treatment plant at Poolbeg. They would look at existing traffic in the area and examine how the proposed plant would impact on this, exploring what the extra traffic volume would be, and at what times of the day it would most apply. Dublin is already near its limit for traffic capacity, and if the extra volumes introduced by a thermal treatment plant were centred around peak times, the strain would probably be too much. If however, the extra traffic was focused on off-peak hours, the problem would be much less acute. The Port Tunnel would help alleviate traffic coming from the north side of the city, but plans to lessen the numbers of trucks using Ringsend as their route to the south of the city or country were not yet in place.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 60

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Dennis Fitzgerald:

Dennis is a meteorologist working with Met Eireann. His speciality is Agro-Meteorology and climate statistics. Dennis spoke to the group about inversions whereby the loss of heat from the ground can also cool the air that is in close contact with the ground. A warmer band of air often overlays these low level inversions, especially during winter, and pollution from a city can often get trapped at this level. This would be something to bear in mind when considering emissions from a thermal treatment plant. High chimney stacks would help the emissions to rise above the inversions and avoid getting trapped, but it is not something that could automatically be guaranteed. A number of chimney stacks in close proximity to each other could actually set up a ‘looping’ effect whereby emissions were not dispersed high up in the air, but were in fact directed towards the ground, or even remained static and accumulating.

Dennis also spoke about Ireland’s prevailing winds. These are normally from a westerly direction which means that any emissions from a thermal treatment plant on the east coast would normally be blown out to sea. However, at times an easterly airflow can prevail for up to a week, and this would have implications for the pollution levels resulting from emissions that would not be dispersed, or would be blown back in over the city. It would be important for any proposed plant to show how theirFor inspection stacks purposes would only. be constructed in order for people to Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. decide whether the risks of pollution had been adequately dealt with.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 61

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Summary and Conclusions

The CIG process has extended for some months beyond its original deadline of May 2002. This has been due to the difficulties of the members in extracting meaningful information from the relevant sources, and the time required to assess this information. As of yet, there are still strong feelings within the group that not all the necessary information has been obtained, and that not all of the group’s remit has been carried out. The original timescale set in place by Dublin City Council is seen as far too short for the group to carry out their remit properly, leading them to believe that their work was never going to be taken seriously by the authorities anyway.

Revisiting the terms of reference for the CIG committee is a useful way of highlighting where the group feels it stands at the moment:

• There are strong fears that if the group identifies issues of concern regarding the proposal to build a Waste to Energy facility on the Poolbeg peninsula, this will be used to feed into a procurement process or a scoping document, which in turn may actually assist any developer of such a facility. In this way, CIG members are worried that their hard work might be used to help move the thermal treatment process along, when in fact they have considerable For inspection purposes objections only. to the proposal for the Poolbeg Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. incinerator. Some issues of concern were raised by the group, but the preference was to speak of these only in general terms, and not in specific detail.

• Some members of the group do not feel that they have had the opportunity to properly assess the work carried out by Dublin Corporation to determine the need for a Waste to Energy facility, or to assess the action that has been taken to identify an appropriate site for the facility. This is largely due to the perceived lack of transparency on the part of Dublin Corporation or Dublin City Council, whereby CIG members have been unable to get full information about how Poolbeg was selected as the preferred site, or even whether Dublin City Council have properly explored alternative means of waste disposal before opting for incineration.

• The CIG committee did have access to a range of experts in order to discuss the impact of similar facilities on other locations throughout Europe, and the effects on

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 62

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 the health and safety of humans and on the environment. However, on occasion this information was too technical for the group to feel it could be of much use to them. There was also little opportunity for the group to coordinate future strategies arising out of this information. Many members of the group feel that there was a lack of clarity and transparency in the information they gathered, and that in many cases questions were avoided or not properly answered. And so the CIG feel that they have not learnt all they wish to know about the realistic impacts of a thermal treatment plant on their area, or on the health and safety of the residents.

• Most members of the CIG committee have no desire to indicate any questions that would need to be addressed in an Environmental Impact Statement in order to respond to areas of community concern. To do so would not only help a developer to avoid potential areas of difficulty for himself, but it would be tantamount to doing a developer’s homework. For this reason, the CIG do not wish their report to be used either in the procurement process or in a future scoping document, as they would not like to take any action that might actually help the planning and construction of a thermal treatment facility in their area.

• Finally, the CIG have prepared a report on the process they have been involved in - namely this document - and this For inspectionis for purposesdissemination only. to the community and interested Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. stakeholders. The emphasis of the report has been on the process itself, since this is what CIG members feel it is important for the wider community to be aware of. Presenting detailed concerns about thermal treatment might have the end result of feeding into scoping document, something the CIG are clear they do not wish to do.

What emerges clearly from this survey of the terms of reference is that the members of the CIG feel very strongly that they have been frustrated in their attempts to get answers to many of the questions they have around the whole issue of thermal treatment, from the siting of a proposed plant, to the need for thermal treatment in the first place, right down to plans for handling the extra traffic and pollution that such a plant will lead to in their area.

The CIG members have decided to prepare this report of the process they have been engaged in, outlining some of these frustrations, but also informing the wider community of what the CIG meetings have actually been about. The CIG do not wish this report to be used as part of

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 63

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 the procurement process, and they do not wish it to be used in a scoping document to aid an EIA. Nor do the CIG wish this report to be interpreted as in any way representing the opinions of the wider community. It is simply a record of the process they have been involved in, and the concerns they have raised about this process.

The feelings of frustration and scepticism that are evident from this report are shared by almost all members of the CIG, and lead to a strong sense that this process has been flawed and even a PR exercise from the very beginning. Some people believe that the process has been more of a failure than a success. This is true from a group point of view, since many believe that no consensus of opinion was arrived at, and certainly no strategy was formulated for future action on the part of the group. The main fear however, is that this process will be regarded by authorities as sufficient public consultation for the entire project, and that the questions raised in the course of the process will be simply disregarded while the development proceeds unchanged.

Almost three years ago an incinerator was planned for the Ringsend area under the management of a company called Bio-burn. At this time the local residents campaigned strongly against such a facility in their area, and they were successful in their bid to stop it. Now similar plans for thermal treatment are being made for the region, and some members of CIG believe that it will be up to the public For inspection again purposes to only. make their views heard in a manner that Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. cannot be ignored.

While the members of the CIG have worked hard and given up much of their time to participate in this new process, they believe that it is unlikely that their deliberations or responses will make any difference to the proposals for thermal treatment at Poolbeg. The small CIG committee has not had much success in affecting the process set in motion by Dublin City Council, and now that they have detailed this process to the wider community, it is to be hoped that public opinion might be mobilised to greater effect.

The CIG also believe that this is an issue that extends far beyond the immediate areas of Ringsend, Irishtown and Sandymount. The proposed incinerator is intended to take waste from the entire Dublin region, and so the CIG feel that it is something that affects the entire Dublin population. They would like to see others in the city begin to take an interest in the cause, and not simply leave the fight up to those who live closest to the Poolbeg Peninsula.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 64

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Appendix One

Members of the CIG who contributed to this report:

Lorcan Casey Eleanor Devitt Colm Duggan Michael Fitzpatrick Eileen Lawless Samuel Mateer Rosemary McKean Michael O’Kane Betty Watson Gabrielle Weafer Teresa Weafer Claire Wheeler

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 65

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:06 Appendix Two

The Statutory Stages as Identified by Dublin City Council:

Dublin Waste to Energy Project Public Involvement in the Statutory Processes

The following is a general description of opportunities for the public to be involved in the Statutory Processes in respect of the Dublin Waste to Energy Project. It should be noted that it is impossible at this early stage to give exact details or dates when each process will commence.

It is important to note that not withstanding the opportunity of members of the public to make submission to Dublin City Council at all stages of the Project, each Statutory Process allows for maximum public involvement and there is an obligation on the part of Dublin City Council to ensure that these opportunities are publicised.

Dublin City Council proposes to appoint a Service Provider to undertake the statutory processes in respect of the Dublin Waste to Energy Project. It is envisaged that a Service Provider will be appointed at the end of For 2003inspection and purposes will only. begin the necessary preparations for the Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Planning, Licensing and Authorisation Processes (see below).

Currently all submissions, comments, and objections from members of the public in respect of the Project are made directly to Dublin City Council through the Ringsend Regional Office. This Office was established in October 2000 to facilitate this activity. Submissions and objections will be made in this way until the involvement of the Statutory bodies i.e. when the planning and licence applications are submitted. At that point, all submissions in respect of the project are made directly to the relevant authority, within the period specified in the public notification which is by way of public notices in the newspapers.

The Dublin Waste to Energy Facility will require approval and licences under the laws relating to planning, waste management, integrated pollution control and electricity regulation. Such elements will require separate Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), the

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 66

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:07 content of which is regulated by law and is subject to the individual requirements of each relevant authority.

Approval by An Bord Pleanala

The facility will require planning approval by An Bord Pleanala under the Planning Acts and the application for such approval will be made to that agency directly.

Once the Service Provider is appointed the preparation of the Environmental Impact Statement will begin and members of the public are invited to make submission during this preparatory phase.

The Planning and Development Act 2000 and regulations made under the Act require local authorities to give public notice that it proposes to apply to An Bord Pleanála for approval and that an EIS has been prepared in respect of the proposed development. Times and places shall be specified where copies of the EIS may be inspected. This inspection period (not less than six weeks) provides the opportunity for members of the public to make submission directly to the Board. The Board may require further information about the development, in which case the period for submissions is extended by a minimum of three weeks. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. It is entirely at the discretion of the Board to grant planning approval at this point, or to commence with an oral hearing. If planning approval is given (or not as the case may be), objections can be made directly to the Board, which may result in an oral hearing. During such a hearing, all interested parties will be invited to participate, after which the Board will make its decision.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 67

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:07 Licence from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

An Integrated Pollution Control Licence will be required from the EPA. This licence outlines the specific details in relation to controls and limits on the emissions and discharges as well as outlining operational conditions. This Licence, if granted will be subject to review and possible modification by the Agency. A waste licence may also be required from the EPA depending on the exact nature and extent of the operation of the proposed plant.

The Licensing Process is not dissimilar to the Planning process in that there is a requirement on behalf of the applicant to publicise the intention to acquire a Licence. The application is submitted to the Agency and made available for public inspection. Members of the public are invited to make submissions. The application must be accompanied by an EIS. Once the EPA has deemed the application valid, the application is examined in detail. In the case of a successful application the Agency will publish a draft Licence that will be made available to the public for the purpose of making submissions. The Agency can reserve the right to inform the decision making process by convening an oral hearing. At all stages throughout this process there are clearly defined opportunities for the public to make submission. All reasonable steps will be taken to provide the necessary public notices.

Authorisation and Licences relating For to inspection electricity purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

The project will require an authorisation from the Commission for Energy Regulation to construct an electricity generation station and a licence to generate and perhaps also to supply electricity. An EIS is required in this regard.

Such an authorisation will be sought subject to the successful completion of the planning and licensing processes.

Compulsory Acquisition of Land

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 68

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:07 The procedures relating to the compulsory acquisition of land, provide for confirmation by An Bord Pleanala. The inspector conducting an oral hearing may also require the submission of an EIS. The City Council has earlier indicated in the public notice relating to the CPO that an EIS is to be prepared.

The authority to acquire land compulsory is contained in the Housing Acts and Planning and Development Act 2000. The latter Act changed confirmation powers of CPO from the Minister to An Bord Pleanála (cf. Section 214 of Act).

Individual written notices are served on owners, lessees and occupiers (except tenants for a month or less).

Requirements regarding service of notices are dealt with in Housing Act 1966 (Acquisition of land regulations 2000). Objectors (parties with a legal interest in the land) have 21 days to lodge objections to the Board following the service of notices.

The Board cannot confirm the CPO until an oral hearing is held into any objections that may be made and until it has considered the objections and the report of the person who held the oral hearing.

For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use.

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 69

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:07 Appendix Three

The following is a series of verbatim quotes that arose in the course of interviews and meetings with the members of the CIG. This allows the differing opinions, and many of the urgent concerns to be encapsulated in the group’s own words.

“People [Dublin City Council & M.C. O’Sullivan] have been taking information from this stuff and organising it in ways to suit themselves.”

“The timescale involved was way too short, especially since the experts themselves had years to prepare all of this stuff.”

“There was no cohesiveness in the group...when you put a group of relative strangers together it’s very hard for them to work on a plan.”

“It just shows the patriarchal attitude the authorities have always had to the members of the community.”

“I’m not sure if I was selected to be selected [for participation in the CIG process]” For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. “I started with a relatively open mind. I thought I’d come and I’d try and make my mind up as to what to make of what was going on.”

”The process should have given me a bit more confidence in what was happening, and the main purpose of the process should have been to instill that sort of satisfaction in people and allay concerns, and in fact it has only done the opposite.”

“It may have set out to do a certain job...but I feel the process has failed.”

“I came with an open mind, but now I’d be very much against the whole thing as a result of what we’ve had to put up with.”

“It’s information overload.”

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 70

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:07 “It’s just as bad as getting no information.”

“There seems to be very little integrity in relation to the process...they [Dublin City Council and M.C. O’Sullivan] don’t seem to have a problem with conflict of interests.”

“The independent facilitator was paid for by M.C. O’Sullivan, and some of the experts were brought along to advance the case for incineration.”

“The authorities have lied and misled the people that are coming to these meetings.”

“If this group feeds into the procurement document this will be their [Dublin City Council and M.C. O’Sullivan’s] public consultation.”

“They [Dublin City Council and M.C. O’Sullivan] made a decision that was not their’s to make [about thermal treatment plant and its siting].”

“They’re bringing the people in after the fact.”

“They’ve put the cart before the horse in the whole process...it’s all been done backwards.” For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. “I wasn’t really ready for dealing with the experts and their opinions, because I was still trying to get a handle on this pre-preparation stuff.”

“The City Manager stood up and said it was all down to his decision in the end...so that meant that what we were saying didn’t matter!”

“The whole waste system is based on economics, not on best practice or best technology ...in economics, minimum standards apply... It’s big business.”

“When there are going to be hundreds of millions spent, wouldn’t you think that they would go for the best?”

“Any kind of accident will be catastrophic.”

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 71

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:07 “If it’s so safe, it could be put anywhere.”

“They [the CIG members] couldn’t agree on anything.”

“My main concern would be with the emissions - in the air, and in the water and in the ground.”

“The traffic thing is huge - you’re talking about hundreds of trucks a day.”

“The traffic in Ringsend is already a big problem.”

“The people here have very high rates of asthma, and very high rates of depression - and this will only make a bad situation worse.”

“I feel very frustrated about the whole thing, because I wasn’t mandated to represent the community, but they keep on saying that we do represent them.”

“I’ve had people telling me I’m for the incinerator - but I’m not. I’m just trying to find out how to stop it.” For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. “I still came out [of the meetings] wondering why I was there - and I’m still wondering!”

“I’ve never seen Big Brother, but that’s what it reminds me of - people from all over just put in a room together and told to get along.”

“We stayed on board to ask the hard questions, but we haven’t got any answers.”

“It’s all a done deal - they won’t pay any attention to what we’ve said, and they’ll go ahead and build the thing anyway.”

“I really feel it’s a PR exercise, from the beginning.”

“If we feed into scoping we’re doing a developer’s homework for them.”

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 72

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:07 “I’d be considered an expert in my own field, and I don’t ask people what I should take account of when I’m doing my job.”

“One of our terms of reference was to assess the work done by Dublin City Council in determining the need for thermal treatment, and I don’t think we have had a proper chance to do that.”

“I’m really worried that if we don’t put something into scoping about our concerns that the developer will think that we don’t have any concerns.”

“If we feed into scoping we’re helping the process forward.”

“How can you help the process if you’re against it?”

“I think if we include really hard questions in the scoping document, that we’ll get something that they won’t be able to answer.”

“When this process is over, I don’t want to be involved again.”

“The group have worked very hard, and For inspectionwe’ve purposes been only. very analytical, and we’ve stuck it out to Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. the end.”

“It’s down to the public now - they have to get mobilised and protest this thing.”

“It’s a problem for all of Dublin - it shouldn’t just be left up to Ringsend to fight it.”

Prepared by Mercator Marketing Research 73

EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:25:07