Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
PERMISSION HAS BEEN granted for the building of the controversial incinerator in Ringaskiddy, Co Cork.
The 17-year plan to put an incinerator at the Indaver site in Ringaskiddy had been met with resistance from the community, local politicians and members of PDFORRA, the Defence Forces representative body.
Despite this opposition, waste company Indaver has been now been granted permission by An Bord Pleanála to build the waste-to-energy incinerator in Cork Harbour.
The company applied in December 2015 to build the incinerator.
It was the third application to build an incinerator on the site since 2001.
An application to build the plant was rejected by An Bord Pleanala in 2011 on the grounds that the plan did not adequately plan for flooding or coastal erosion.
Previous hearings took place in 2003 and 2009, and inspectors at both recommended refusal for the project, with the 2009 inspector’s recommendation being carried by the Bord, and a planning refusal issued in 2011.
Two days before Christmas 2015 An Bord Pleanala ruled the incinerator constitutes strategic infrastructure development, allowing for another application.
Indaver submitted a planning application to An Bord Pleanála for a 240,000 tonne per annum waste-to-energy facility in Ringaskiddy.
The facility will treat household, commercial, industrial, non-hazardous and suitable hazardous waste, generating approximately 18.5MW of electricity for export to the national grid.
Oral hearings were held in April and May 2016 and a final decision has been expected for almost two years.
Commenting on the ABP decision today, Green Party leader Eamon Ryan told RTÉ’s Today With Sean O’Rourke that it was “hugely disappointing”.
“We’re not going into a world where we should be burning our rubbish,” he said.
Ryan said that burning of waste was a thing done in the past and that the world needed to move towards a circular economy of recycling and renewal.
“This is Government policy driving it. I think they do want and they could have stopped it at any stage,” he said.
Also speaking on the show, Mary O’Leary of the campaign group Chase said that the decision by ABP had undermined the credibility of the planning process.
“What is the point of people going through an oral hearing… and yet it is all ignored?” she said.
She described the decision as “shocking”.
“We are shocked, angry and deeply disappointed that the Bord has granted permission,” she said.
The endless delays in coming to this decision was always a cause for concern but we hoped against hope that the Bord would make the right decision.
Fine Gael Cork South Central Senator, Jerry Buttimer said:
“Today’s decision by An Bord Pleanála is extremely disappointing. I know it will be very frustrating for the residents and also for the Cork Harbour Alliance for a Safe Environment (CHASE) whose members have worked so hard on this matter.
“The case they made against the incinerator at the oral hearing of An Bord Pleanála was compelling.
“I stand with the people of Cork in opposition to this incinerator.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Terrible sad on everyone involved :(
Anyone who never made a mistake, has never made anything. But how vastly the consequences can vary from the same type of mistake in two different scenarios is a really cruel fact. Sad for all involved me thinks.
There are regulations in place to prevent such shoddy workmanship in this field. Inexcusable. It’s not like having a go at painting and splashing a bit on the skirting board
If only you could regulate against human error, it’s always been there and it always will.
Every rented accommodation holiday or otherwise should be fitted with a carbon monoxide detector.
The judge heard all of the evidence and had the full reports from the varoius investigation bodies. I think that puts him in a better position than than armchair commentators when it comes to sentencing.
Comments should be closed.
Paul nobody is forcing you to read comments
Glen,
There’s an ongoing trial in this jurisdiction.
Had it anything to do with this one or is it similar.
Not with these people
Sam Aritan called it above.
He said similar not ongoing
Yes,
I have reported my own comment to thejournal.ie with a request that comments be closed.
This is why.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/plumber-returned-for-trial-over-death-of-woman-in-kinsale-hotel-1.1548926
I hope you see the reason now, and that comments be closed and removed.
Paul
Point taking after reading that. It could hinder a jury’s decision … Good call!
This is a different case so your request is completely unreasonable. Maybe you should move to China where they are more obliging with censorship
Dauhee,
Your publicly debating an issue that may shortly be going before a jury. It’s not censorship, I’m attempting to avert an issue which could affect the outcome of a trial.
Dan,
Thejournal removed links on the St.Patricks day assault for fear of compromising a trial.
What would you like to say about this story that doesn’t make you look stupid?
I actually was hinting at it in my post above, Paul. in fact, when i saw the comments were open my first thought was of surprise.
I’m assuming they are closely monitoring the thread just in case some dope decides to spout about other ones down south.
But it was risky on the Journal’s behalf I would have thought.
Separate cases. If a murder trial had just been concluded should comments be blocked for fear of compromising other on going murder cases?
Paul, you’re the one that keeps bringing up the case-that-shouldn’t-be-uttered. Maybe you could just stop trying to create an issue??????
If a jury has to be selected, why give the defence fuel to apply for a mistrial?
Paul, I am sure the defence lawyers will point out any risk of undue prejudice caused by media reports on the matter and the judge will make the call as to whether it has or not
Sorry didn’t see that comment there
I understand that, Dave. But the Journal is not monitored 24/7.
I would take a different immediate view to Paul (albeit slightly) in that I would have thought the Journal were the ones taking the risk of some dope coming on here and talking about similar ongoing cases in our own jurisdiction.
Either way, it is risky for them. But it’s their call, not mine.
As long as the comments are not out of bounds, I welcome the thread being open.
We’ve had similar cases down South too. Tragic.
The sentencing sounds incredibly lenient to me. I understand it’s a manslaughter charge, but two years for two teenaged deaths. I see it as no different to drink driving and causing deaths. Or gross negligence causing deaths.
No different to drink driving? this guy made a mistake at work and people died, tragic for everyone involved. nothing like drink driving.
No he did not make a mistake, he is a gas safe registered fitter & will be all to aware of the consequences of cutting corners when carrying out this type in installation, unfortunately this type of thing is happening to frequently, I have seen it before in London & in a hotel of all places, where an existing flue was modified to join onto a new gas boiler installation, tape was used to make up the shortfall between the boiler & flue, & to use that engineering term – it was a bodge job. In this case two young people are dead because of carelessness, which could have been avoided by carrying out the correct checks on completion or using a flue specialist to make sure everything was working in a safe manner.
“An investigation was started by the PSNI and the Health and Safety Executive NI’s Gas Safety Inspection team found that sections of the flue were not secured properly at the bend (pictured). Screws were missing and the sections did not slot into each other properly.”
That’s not a mistake. If screws were found to be missing in an airplane and people were killed, I don’t think one would call it a mistake.
Manslaughter is a fair judgement but I think he should of got 5 years and not a day less.
It’s the law to install a Carbon monoxide alarm on all new boiler installs and only a fool would not install one as it can save a life. €20 that’s all
poor workmanship is the scourge of this country..two years is a good verdict.
have your say