Construction of a proposed ‘Eco Park’ in Sheperton, Surrey will go ahead after the cabinet of Surrey County Council voted on Tuesday (28 May) to accept recommendations to continue with the project.
The proposed facilities in the complex, located at Charlton Lane, Shepperton, include:
Waste management company SUEZ ENVIRONNEMENT (formerly known as SITA UK) were originally granted planning permission by the council in March 2012, but in July 2013 the cabinet attached seven conditions to the contract that reflected the council’s new waste strategy, and sought to amend the environmental permit to reflect the replacement of the gasification technology provider (as the previous supplier, Ascot Environmental, ceased trading).
At Tuesday’s meeting a report by Mike Goodman, Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning, stated that all seven of these conditions had been met, and thus recommended that the council proceed to final approval of the plans.
Eco Park is ‘the most affordable solution for this council’
Speaking at the cabinet meeting, Goodman explained that the Director of Finance had concluded that the plan “represents the best value for money for residents of Surrey, it represents the best value for money for the public sector and it represents the most affordable solution for this council”.
The director’s assessment had been aided by advice from financial advisor Deloitte and technical advisor Mott McDonald.
Goodman noted that the Deloitte report estimated that the delay to the regulatory process since October 2013 led to a £16.7 million increase to the capital costs of the project, taking the overall cost to £91.3 million, but stated that “even taking this into consideration, the project remains value for money”.
Addressing concerns with the public health and air quality consequences of the Eco Park, Goodman said: “This council takes the health of the Surrey public very seriously and considerable work was done during the plan and regulatory stages to provide assurances on this matter.”
Additional air quality monitors will be installed on the site to ensure this, Goodman confirmed.
As such, the project will now go ahead, and is expect to deliver 300 construction jobs and 42 permanent jobs,. Once complete, the park will produce enough green electricity to power over 8000 homes as well as the park itself.
A spokesperson for SUEZ ENVIRONNEMENT said: "We are pleased that Surrey County Council’s Cabinet has decided to proceed with the Eco Park development, which will increase recycling and treat waste that can’t be recycled to generate enough energy for thousands of homes.
"Construction is planned to start this summer and will take around two and a half years."
Eco Park plans for incineration ‘ludicrous’, according to Green councillor
The project has not been met with universal approval among the council, however. Prior to Tuesday’s cabinet meeting, councillor and Chair of South East Green Party Jonathan Essex called on the cabinet to scrap the plans.
Writing on his blog, Essex argued that the cost of the park could be better spent investing in more recycling and reuse technology.
He said: “I think it’s ludicrous [that] Surrey County Council will have to make further cuts across the council – because the government encourages it to build an incinerator which reduces by millions the money that is available to allocate to local councils, including Surrey.
“The £85 to £160 million of public money saved from not building the eco-park could be invested in good waste management: reducing, reusing and recycling even more of what we currently throw away.
“We should follow best practice in Europe, where the best councils aim for zero waste without incineration, with over 85 per cent recycling rates already being achieved.”
Watch Tuesday’s cabinet meeting online or find out more about the proposed Charlton Lane Eco Park.
resource.co article ai
How will the government and DMOs address the challenges of including glass in DRS while ensuring a level playing field across the UK?
There's no easy solution to include glass in the DRS while maintaining a level playing field. Potential approaches include a phased introduction of glass, potentially with higher deposits to reflect its logistical challenges. The government and DMOs could incentivise innovation in glass packaging design and subsidise dedicated return points for glass-handling. Exemptions for smaller businesses unable to handle glass might also be necessary. Any successful solution will likely blend several approaches. It must address the differing priorities of devolved administrations, balance environmental benefits with logistical and cost implications, and be supported by robust consumer education campaigns emphasizing the importance of glass recycling.