Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of MRW, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.

Headline

Campaigners renew anti-EfW efforts

Comment

Seemingly, the information held in private by Gloucestershire CC, which shows that the UBB project requires a treatment fee of £140+ per tonne has been rumbled. It is already known that proposals already in the pipeline elsewhere are being mooted at treatment fees of £zero per tonne input and these programmes can make a really positive business case to produce renewables (fuels and energy) which for the remaining organic materials that would result will cost considerably less than that which is proposed here (CAPEX) and be competitive. Saving £140 per tonne on even 190,000 per year alone is £26+million and that cannot be ignored by any "cash-strapped" council and the Council-Tax payers should surely be given this. Incineration is - as reported - yesterday's technology and too expensive.

Posted date

27 March, 2017

Posted time

9:42 am

required
required
required
required