Following evidence given by three members of Save Our Shoreline to the
Environmental Scrutiny Panel back in April, quite a lot has happened,
much unreported, for reasons that may become evident in the weeks to
come.
You can find a full blow by blow transcript of the Hearing here
and read our previous Press Release and see our photographic and other
evidence here.
In essence, this is how things went:
THE EVIDENCE
Save Our Shoreline members Andrew Syvret, Dave Cabeldu and Lara Luke,
gave evidence on several related subjects, all linked to the disposal
of hazardous waste at La Collette.
SOS had already presented a photographic and detailed record of events
over a two month period, demonstrating without doubt that ash had been
liberated to the sea in two sites, at the excavation for the new incinerator,
and at Dandara's Castle Quay site. In both cases, the sea was flooding
the sites at high tides, and in going out again, taking the toxic ash
and asbestos in solution to sea twice daily.
SOS photos also showed material containing ash
blowing out to sea over Havre Des Pas, a designated Ramsar area,
when dumped alongside the ash pits. With the tidal drift going west
to east, we are very concerned that heavy metals will in time build
up in the sediment and then the filter feeding shellfish, and thus enter
the human food chain. Unlike E-coli, heavy metals build up slowly and
are there for ever.
PLANNING
Up until the Scrutiny Panel Hearing, Planning had dismissed SOS' concerns,
and refused to contact the Ramsar Organisation for advice - a bit rich
really when Planning Minister Freddie Cohen and his CEO Andy Scate,
have both made great play about the importance of the Ramsar designation
of our South East Coast. As far as we know, the Minister's view has
not changed; he does not accept that there may be a potential threat
to the marine environment despite evidence to the contrary and the concerns
of other respected organisations such as The Socété Jersiase,
and The National Trust etc.
THE WATER REGULATOR
Environment's Water Regulator William Peggie has been playing 'ostrich'
regarding both sites, merely stating that removing ash from Castle Quay
to La Collette would be of 'net benefit'. Mr. Peggie denies that the
ash at Castle Quay will have polluted the marine environment. SOS contend
that pollution must have happened to some as yet unknown degree, and
may not show up for some time. In any case, surely it is better not
to let a potentially serious pollution incident happen in the first
place than to watch it happen and not stop it?
LA COLLETTE
At La Collette, the Water Discharge Permit Application that was initially
required for the incinerator foundations (and to which SOS strongly
objected) was dropped. It seems bizarre to request a permit when the
tide flooded the site in any case and only a token amount of water was
being taken to Bellozanne. As far as we know work is progressing without
the required permit, which we were told was not in any case obligatory!
The EIS identified that flooding was likely but no remedial precautions
were taken before work commenced. On our visits, the
site was flooded, no pumps were in operation and the water went
back to sea carrying any leachate with it. Only a States funded project
could have got away with this abject flaunting of the law.
THE RAMSAR ORGANISATION
The good news is that Scrutiny accepted that SOS' evidence and concerns
were well founded and took the welcome step of contacting the Ramsar
Organisation in Switzerland for advice. This is the FIRST time that
our government has done so since the designation! One would have hoped
that Environment would have worked closely with Ramsar after the designation
rather than ignoring them?
INDEPENDENT CONSULTANTS
Ramsar recommended that the firm of consultants, Bioscan UK, be retained.
Bioscan have already visited the island and will present a preliminary
report to Scrutiny in July. Their remit includes a critique on the original
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) conducted by Babtie Fichtner and
which accompanied the Planning Application for the Incinerator. The
Statement has already been roundly criticised by such authorities as
Dr. Stephan Funk of Nature Heritage. (Dr. Funk's comments can be found
here).
Two members of Save Our Shoreline and at least one representative from
the Jersey Aquaculture Association have been invited to meet with Bioscan
and Scrutiny on 8th July. The Jersey Aquaculture Association's earlier
submission to Scrutiny can be found here.
Despite our best efforts, including the evidence presented to the Scrutiny
Panel, substantial correspondence and a meeting between SOS pollution
consultant Lara Luke and William Peggie, the Water Regulator, SOS' concerns
seem not to be taken seriously by the department. No action was or has
been taken and unsatisfactory answers received. TTS have a duty of care
to the environment and to human health. In allowing raw toxic incinerator
ash, and in addition unknown amounts of other hazardous materials, to
be flooded by the sea on a regular basis over an extended period could
be seen as ignoring the Precautionary Principal. If we are correct,
the release of highy toxic leachate to the marine environment is illegal
under the Water Pollution laws that the Environmental and Water Regulators
are there to enforce, and also under International conventions that
Jersey is signed up to.
If heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury build up in the ecosystem
at some future date they will be there for ever. SOS believe that this
situation should never have been allowed to happen and ask whether Planning
would have approved the construction if the likelihood of flooding had
been highlighted in the required report accompanying the Application?
If it was, why was permission granted? If flooding was not identified
as likely why not? What contingencies were put in place?
BASELINE STUDIES
SOS are now involved with an independent baseline study covering three
areas of the South East coast, in order to lay down 'markers' of the
health of our marine life. We have long expected for this to be done
but Environment consider that testing slipper limpet and one species
of seaweed bi-annually is sufficient testing for heavy metals. SOS disagree
and suggest that several species in the relevant areas be tested, together
with sediment, which is where the heavy metals settle out and can be
ingested by filter feeders such as mussels and oysters. This summer
will see the start of two independent surveys, one conducted by SOS
members.
Our April press release and other links can be found here
Save Our Shoreline
working to protect our marine environment.
Find us on Facebook and comment on any of our posts. Or simply
show your support by sending us a friend request!
Just click on the logo below.
Save Our Shoreline Jersey
Email us
January 2012 |November 2011 |September 2011 |July 2011 |May 2011 |March 2011 |
February 2011 |January
2011 | December 2010 |November
2010 |October 2010 |September
2010 | July 2010 | June
2010 | May 2010 | April
2010 | March 2010 | February
2010 | January 2010 (Eyewitness
Report EfW) | December 2009
| November 2009 Update | November
2009 | September 2009
| August 2009 | July
2009 | April 2009 Press Release
