Worse than volcanic ash

[slimc]

Has anyone been made aware of the MASSIVE household waste incinerator that Ineos chlor are putting up at the moment in Runcorn???
Apart from the carcinogenic pollution, this is going to be spewing out tons and tons of plastic vapour (amongst other) into the atmosphere
But in their infinite wisdom this is directly under the incoming flight path for Liverpool airport.
The damage this will cause ALL aircraft engines coming in to land will make the recent Icelandic volcano pale into insignificance.
This will also have an knock effect for Manchester airport as it will take over 50 miles of been airborne to start dispersing

[Fox Echo]

Don't really know why this is posted in the GA section. As a first post on the forum it sounds like environmentalist scaremongering.
Your comparison with the Icelandic volcano is quite incredible.

It appears that neither LPL or MAN objected, nor any of the airlines using them, although they had ample opportunity to do so, suggesting they themselves do not see this as a risk.

There does not seem to be any real scientific basis for your rather extreme claims. There is in fact evidence that on Bonfire night alone there is 25 times the air pollution from dioxins in the UK in one night than the dioxin pollution emitted over a full year by all plants of this type. What evidence do you have that any similar plant anywhere in the world has damaged aircraft engines?

In case you are wondering I have no connection whatsoever with Ineos Chlor.

[slimc]

Unfortunatley your comment has no basis of "scaremongering". There was no public/industrial consultation.
Environmentalist certainly not. Just wait til you see the chimneys appear.

Then when high levels of ash, Heavy metals, plastics, VOC's, PCB etc etc. Are causing major mechanical damage (let alone health issues)
Bonfire night, ? That isnt the same by any stretch.
Usually these plants are built away from flight paths. Esp direct line of sight for incoming traffic attempting to land.

I certainly won't be using LPL again once this site is up and running

[viscount]

A chemical vapour, by being a vapour (ie chemicals in a non-solid, gaseous state) will not interfere with the internal workings of a jet or internal combustion engine, unless in explosive proportions or in such massive concentrations ordinary combustable atmospheric gases are excluded.

A gaseous vapour is quite different in form to silica rich ash - ash being a fine material composed of fragmented solid. It is the abrasive and clogging capabilities of high temperature resiliant silica (glass) rich ash that concerned the airframe and engine maufacturers after the Icelandic volcanic eruption.

Environmental regulations control closely the easily monitored solid ie the ash and dust output from industrial chimneys (removed by a series of 'scubbers'). Todays efficient scrubber technology was developed in response to a need to clean-up the carbon emissions from coal fired power stations under pressure from the environmental lobby.

While there may well be a cause for NIMBY protest and concern over the chemical gaseous chimney output, coupled with possible carcogenic results of burning plastics; I'm sorry but the very limited amounts of solid ash/dust ejected into the atmosphere will not be an excuse to have the plant closed down. Indeed like Fox Echo I consider the claims in the initial post as enviromentalist scaremongering.

Outside of the aviation industry the term 'general aviation' is applied to aviation in general, losing its specific industry meaning, applied to lighter end of business aviation. A problem that can be found in the diversity of topics in that forum section and the reason the moderator moved this thread.

If you wish to avoid Liverpool Airport, that is your choice - but if you are worried by tall chimneys in the locality of an airport, don't use East Midlands as an alternative.

[slimc]

Viscount,
The existing chemical plant may give off chemical vapour.
However the incinerator will not be giving out "chemical" vapours.

It sounds like a typical reaction when poeple dont like to hear something. They bury heads in the sand and quote "NIMBY" and use terms like scaremongering.

Ignorance is bliss

[Fox Echo]

There certainly was full public, industrial & local authority consultation.

Liverpool Airport was consulted & confirmed it had no objection as its own evidence saw no risk to ops.

The bonfire night comparison is not something I made up, that info came from the Government's scientific advisors.

Think it appropiate that this topic has now been moved to the Non-aviation forum.

[viscount]

Slimc,

You need to read my comments a little more slowly. I was simply pointing out that the amount of 'solids' ie dust, ash, put out by highly regulated industrial chimney will not be sufficient to affect engines, as you appeared to be claiming through your choice of title and text content.

However the effect on the population of the chemicals in chimney's gaseous output are a field for valid NIMBY and environmental organisations concern.

If you want to be effective in opposition, use your terms carefully and ensuring the claims made stand up to scrutiny. To me at present two of your claims do not stand up, this weakens considerably your possibly strongest claim regarding the environmental impact on the population of the gases resulting from, even very high temperature, burning of plastics, PCBs etc.

[LPL]

Nov 16, 2010 16:43:58 GMT 1 slimc said:

There was no public/industrial consultation.

Every planning application has certain statutory consultation aspects.

Also I think that any planning application that falls within a set distance of any airport in the UK will also trigger the consultation process.

[LPL]

What is the application reference number?

[mictheslik]

Isn't there a massive incinerator under the approach to the 09s at Heathrow.....doesn't seem to be having much affect there.....

.mic

[woody66]

Slimc,
Do you even know what VOC stands for and are? Quick lesson VOC's are the evaporated liquids of products such as paint, printing inks, air fresheners etc.now back to your posts in both your first and second posts you mention vapours and VOC's being released. However in your reply to Viscount (your third post) you claim that the incinerater will not be giving out vapours, come on now you can't have it both ways which is it to be, think very carefully before you reply as I have worked in the chemical industry for over twenty years and know just how tightly it is regulated. Here is a question for you though are you aware that Ineos(ICI) have been incinerating waste from their VC plant for at least ten years if not longer and believe you me the waste from that production is far worse than burning domestic waste, which I believe is to be sorted first so that only materials suitable for incineration will be burnt although I could be wrong. I think your time would be better spent campaining against the tolling of the new bridge.

Rant over.

[rock37]

Yes,their is a similar facility approx 1 km from the threshold of 09L at Heathrow. It has been in operation about 3 years , sofar it has not knocked anything out of the sky. On the subject of polution.How many tons of hydrocarbons are released into the atmosphere by the machines we chase around the world to take pictures of and collect side numbers . nuff said