Why the facts are wrong on £63m Peterborough environment scheme - LETTER
So Councillor Cereste got his facts wrong – certainly not the first time, and no one will be surprised about that. But Richard Olive in his letter of Thursday 28th also has some facts wrong.
The incinerator certainly burns some plastic waste, but the incinerator business and the council urge everyone to put all plastics into the recycling wherever possible. The incinerator burns only black bin waste – and I am firmly of the opinion that incineration is better for the environment than landfill for black bin waste.
Landfill waste produces CO2 as it breaks down; burning it in the incinerator does not produce any more CO2, just produces it immediately rather than over a period of time – and the electricity by product is a bonus.
Landfill wastes land, and creates a problem a generation or two down the line as it disintegrates – witness the landfill sites now eroding into rivers and seas, adding to pollution and plastic waste entering national and international waters. Reducing waste, by recycling wherever possible, is the only way of reducing CO2 created from waste.
So the incinerator prevents our waste going to landfill, and produces electricity for the city to help pay for its running costs. It is an excellent example of good business sense – unlike Councillor Cereste and his notions of ‘improving’ Peterborough.