Poolbeg Incinerator

odyssey06 · 28-08-2017 08:33PM

wordofwarning wrote: »

There appears to be more outrage from this plant actually disposing of waste in a safe manner than the illegal dumping found in Wicklow/Donegal. There is more outrage from the highly regulated plant than illegal waste getting into ground water etc.

Not really. I've no problem with putting the illegal dumpers into the incinerator along with the waste they were about to dump, illegally.
As long as said emissions are not toxic.

That's the only way I can see that the incinerator is going to solve the problem of illegal dumping.

It's not as if the illegal dumpers can stroll up unseen in a hi-ace van and offload their stuff for free into the incinerator ... so it doesn't have appeal for that kind of individual.

So I'm not seeing how the incinerator will help with the illegal dumping - which is outrageous.

odyssey06 · 28-08-2017 08:46PM

onimpulse wrote: »

The area does not have to be industrial and should not be. The fact you and others can't even consider such a possibility is a limiting factor in the future positive development of this city.

David McWilliams had a recent article about why we should move the port and use the large amount of land close to the city centre for residential \ offices etc etc - as has been done in Oslo, Copenhagen, Amsterdam and Bilbao.

"We are one of the last major cities to have a port on the most valuable prime land... At the moment Dublin Port is the greatest waste of prime land imaginable... the State could sell the Port lands for €6 to 7 billion, and build a new port at a fraction of the cost."

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2017/08/20/move-dublin-port-and-create-new-city-on-the-water

killbillvol2 · 29-08-2017 03:25AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

There was no public consultatation on this. There was a sham process.

Dublin City Council ignored the overwhelming vote of its own councillors on the issue. The vote was 50 out of 52 councillors against the proposal.

In what city do you think a Council which ignores the officials I elected will pay the slightest heed to a submission it doesn't like by an ordinary voter?
Hint: it's not this one.

Whatever about its effectiveness, there was more than one public consultation on this. I take it you didn't make a submission.

And a submission from an ordinary voter to the actual process, however much it's a drop in the ocean, is still more effective than posting on boards after the incinerator is up and running.

Cookie_Monster · 29-08-2017 04:18AM

Why is everyone dismissing the emissions as "just steam"? While no where near as bad as smoke and containing far less dangerous emissions it is still dumping a lot of waste heat into the atmosphere.

Don't get me wrong, I support incineration as a good method of dealing with waste (currently at least until better options become mainstream and cost effective) but it's not "just steam"

Del2005 · 29-08-2017 05:34AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

I'm not objecting to a power-generating incinerator full stop.
I'm saying I'm not sure it was put in the best location, given it's effect on the skyline view of the city.
I'm glad to hear it's steam coming out of it but not smoke - I'm not sure how the lay person is supposed to realise that though.

The skyline of the city should be full of tall buildings and then the incinerator wouldn't be noticed but instead we send people 70km+ outside the city to commute, by filthy diesel cars, into the city. Yet you are worried about a bit of steam when the low rise city is polluted with highly dangerous exhaust emissions.

Del2005 · 29-08-2017 05:36AM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Why is everyone dismissing the emissions as "just steam"? While no where near as bad as smoke and containing far less dangerous emissions it is still dumping a lot of waste heat into the atmosphere.

Don't get me wrong, I support incineration as a good method of dealing with waste (currently at least until better options become mainstream and cost effective) but it's not "just steam"

The amount of heat being generated by the incinerator is miniscule compared to the heat generated by the city. So getting rid of the city would be better.

dunleakelleher · 29-08-2017 07:12AM

onimpulse wrote: »

How did we let this happen?

The new Incinerator at Poolbeg is now up and running and is spewing out smoke almost non stop. Did we really need to build an incinerator so close to the city centre? Surely there were better locations?

While other cities in the world try to move industrial sites out of city centres we put new polluting buildings in areas that would otherwise be amazing recreational and scenic areas.

How short sighted and ignorant are our planners to allow this and how stupid are we that we didn't stop it?! Now we're stuck with it for decades most likely.

well, most of the waste incinerated in the plant is generated in the city, so location is local to the source.
also yes industrial sites are being moved out of cities,
but for the reasons mentioned above.(lose to source) you are incorrect in assuming that most European cities have these facilities far out. in fact, most have them very central to the city.

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 08:14AM

Del2005 wrote: »

The skyline of the city should be full of tall buildings and then the incinerator wouldn't be noticed but instead we send people 70km+ outside the city to commute, by filthy diesel cars, into the city. Yet you are worried about a bit of steam when the low rise city is polluted with highly dangerous exhaust emissions.

What have diesel cars got to do with the location of the incinerator???
The government encouraged diesel engines through motor tax - why?
How did we not know in 2008 that diesel emissions were dangerous to human health?
Did whichever state body who signed off on that also sign off that the incinerator was safe?

Does it mean we shouldn't worry about something cosmetic like graffiti on our streets, because there are diesel cars?
Why can't someone be worried about multiple things?

It was Dublin city council that placed the incinerator where they did; and it's Dublin city council that blocks those tall buildings.
Should we assume Dublin city council is infallible?

wordofwarning · 29-08-2017 08:33AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

It's not as if the illegal dumpers can stroll up unseen in a hi-ace van and offload their stuff for free into the incinerator ... so it doesn't have appeal for that kind of individual.

So I'm not seeing how the incinerator will help with the illegal dumping - which is outrageous.

You have a very strong opinion on waste disposal. But you don't seem to know much about the quality waste disposal that went on in Donegal

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/environment/donegal-refuse-collector-a-serial-environmental-offender-1.3081208

Not all illegal dumping is carried out by people in a hi-ace van...

Here is another county and another example

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/high-court/wicklow-council-staff-gave-different-statements-on-illegal-dump-1.3038001

How much research and knowledge do you have on waste disposal in this state? You have very very strong opinions on it...

But you don't seem to understand how some counties dealt with their waste. You don't even appear to realise that an illegal dump is not someone dumping stuff at the end of a lane. But also a private operator not managing their disposal correctly.

An incinerator is a way for a private operator to dispose of their waste correctly. So it is no "outrageous" to assume an incinerator can reduce illegal dumping, if you know what an illegal dump is in the first place...

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 08:42AM

wordofwarning wrote: »

You have a very strong opinion on waste disposal. But you don't seem to know much about the quality waste disposal that went on in Donegal...

What has the Poolbeg incinerator got to do with that guy in Donegal???
Why do I have to know about Donegal to have an opinion on an incinerator in Poolbeg, Dublin?
Is there an incinerator in Donegal who we can use as a reference example for Poolbeg? Because othewise, Donegal could have never existed, or ceased to exist tomorrow, for all the difference it makes to this discussion.

If the Poolbeg incinerator had been operational for the last 10 years, please explain to me how it would have stopped the guy in Donegal for ignoring all the current laws and regulations and put an end to his illegal dumping?

The only thing that will make a difference is enforcement of laws.

If someone is dumping illegally, whether it's a private operator or some guy at the end of a lane, put them in jail. It has absolutely zero to do with the Poolbeg incinerator and it is a logical fallacy to try to tie them together.

There are already legal places for waste to be disposed of. An incinerator is another legal place to dispose of waste. There are zero grounds to believe that this will make a difference to someone already ignoring all the legal places for waste to be disposed of.

wordofwarning · 29-08-2017 09:01AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

What has the Poolbeg incinerator got to do with that guy in Donegal???
Why do I have to know about Donegal to have an opinion on an incinerator in Poolbeg, Dublin?
Is there an incinerator in Donegal who we can use as a reference example for Poolbeg? Because othewise, Donegal could have never existed, or ceased to exist tomorrow, for all the difference it makes to this discussion.

There are already legal places for waste to be disposed of. An incinerator is another legal place to dispose of waste. There are zero grounds to believe that this will make a difference to someone already ignoring all the legal places for waste to be disposed of.

Illegal dumping has worsened over the last few decades as it was harder and harder to find landfill to dump waste. It became more and more expensive. So people started to create illegal landfills

It is nice to see you acknowledge that private operator also illegal dump. I got from your previous post that you only seemed to think that it was only guys in Hi Ace vans, which is not the case clearly. I included this examples to hammer the point to you. Their location is not relevant to the discussion.

Well not entirely. I notice in your point you keep mentioning Donegal and what does it have to do with Dublin. There was illegal dumping in Wicklow. With Poolbeg opening decades ago. That might have never happened.

I dont know if you read the articles. But there is a clearly a trend of councils allegedly knowing about the illegal dumping or possibly use the dump for themselves. If the councils have a cheap and alternative option to landfill ie an incinerator. It will reduce illegal dumping.

I honestly don't think you fully understand what illegal dumping is and who is doing it. So I don't see how you can say this incinerator will not reduce illegal dumping when IMO you don't seem to fully understand it

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 09:18AM

wordofwarning wrote: »

Well not entirely. I notice in your point you keep mentioning Donegal and what does it have to do with Dublin. There was illegal dumping in Wicklow. With Poolbeg opening decades ago. That might have never happened.
I dont know if you read the articles. But there is a clearly a trend of councils allegedly knowing about the illegal dumping or possibly use the dump for themselves. If the councils have a cheap and alternative option to landfill ie an incinerator. It will reduce illegal dumping.
I honestly don't think you fully understand what illegal dumping is and who is doing it. So I don't see how you can say this incinerator will not reduce illegal dumping when IMO you don't seem to fully understand it

You were the one who brought Donegal into the conversation though?

I have asked you to explain how Poolbeg incinerator will reduce illegal waste.
Your response in essence is ... you don't fully understand illegal waste.
Maybe I don't! But that's not what this discussion is about.

If Wicklow County Council is run by a bunch of cowboys who don't care about illegal dumping, if they are already flouting and ignoring all the regulations about illegal dumping, we have a situation full stop. Incinerator or not.
Are we really saying that county councils cannot be trusted to discharge their legal obligations on waste, therefore we must have an incinerator in Dublin city?
And if Wicklow county council cannot be trusted on waste, why can Dublin city council be trusted?

So I reject these assertions:
(a) That one needs to have a full understanding about the national illegal waste situation before commenting on an incinerator in Dublin
(b) That the incinerator will reduce illegal waste and that somehow by questioning the current incinerator design and location I am somehow holding up tackling illegal waste in the country.

neris · 29-08-2017 10:09AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

David McWilliams had a recent article about why we should move the port and use the large amount of land close to the city centre for residential \ offices etc etc - as has been done in Oslo, Copenhagen, Amsterdam and Bilbao.

"We are one of the last major cities to have a port on the most valuable prime land... At the moment Dublin Port is the greatest waste of prime land imaginable... the State could sell the Port lands for €6 to 7 billion, and build a new port at a fraction of the cost."

http://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2017/08/20/move-dublin-port-and-create-new-city-on-the-water

It would take decades to move the port and all its infrastructure, along with the building of a new port and its infrastructure. the port isnt just a few boats and cranes its an industrial area full of oil terminals, oil storage facilities, warehouses and operational industrial buildings & sites. The contamination in the ground alone would probably cause major headaches from an environmental point of view. McWiliams says theres only 140 people employed in the port which is absolute bollox when you consider all the other businesses located in the port area who employ office staff, truck drivers, shop assistants etc. The building of a new port any where is going to take a long time and at the moment theres no where along the east coast that could handle half the ships coming into dublin port without major dredging and then your into the problems of dumping that at sea.

PaulieC · 29-08-2017 10:53AM

onimpulse wrote: »

I know the area is zoned industrial but I think that should be revised, we should be reclaiming spaces like that for recreational use not further industrialising them. There was a proposal a few years ago to move the Port north to near Drogheda, I would fully support such a move so we can clean up our beaches and the port area. We have amazing natural resources in terms of tourism and recreation in Dublin, overshadowed by industry and pollution. Most cities are now making moves to rezone areas like this as recreational or commercial and moving industrial area out of city centres. We're doing the exact opposite which is really disappointing.

You just want the whole shebang moved to Drogheda and let them deal with it ?

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 11:01AM

neris wrote: »

It would take decades to move the port and all its infrastructure, along with the building of a new port and its infrastructure. the port isnt just a few boats and cranes its an industrial area full of oil terminals, oil storage facilities, warehouses and operational industrial buildings & sites. The contamination in the ground alone would probably cause major headaches from an environmental point of view. McWiliams says theres only 140 people employed in the port which is absolute bollox when you consider all the other businesses located in the port area who employ office staff, truck drivers, shop assistants etc. The building of a new port any where is going to take a long time and at the moment theres no where along the east coast that could handle half the ships coming into dublin port without major dredging and then your into the problems of dumping that at sea.

"Transforming Dublin would be a millennial project and would take time but this is what great cities do: they build and they build for the future with a one hundred year vision."

Not dimissing the obstacles you have outlined, but it doesn't seem like McWilliams is suggesting short term solutions here...

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 11:17AM

PaulieC wrote: »

What the actual fcuk ? You're not a Nimby, you just want the whole shebang moved to Drogheda and let them deal with it ?

What's wrong with having a major port near you?
Apart from its incinerartor and the amount of valuable land it is tying up?

What exactly are the people of Dublin city having to "deal with it" at the moment?

PaulieC · 29-08-2017 11:20AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

Anyone opposed to the deployment of modern technology is engaged in NIMBYISM. You read it here.
You can roll that argument out to defend the Death Star! Come on now.

We should change the planning process: "Will your device\structure use the most modern technology"?
Yes: "Grand, put it anywhere you like."
No: "Please tick Yes."

If we're going to have a Death Star can we at least have one that looks a bit sleeker?

onimpulse wrote: »

While I'm glad to hear it will eventually reduce pollution, why is the steam currently being emitted? Is that temporary? In any case, it's an eyesore. Go out today for a walk on Dollymount and tell me otherwise.

I know the area is zoned industrial but I think that should be revised, we should be reclaiming spaces like that for recreational use not further industrialising them. There was a proposal a few years ago to move the Port north to near Drogheda, I would fully support such a move so we can clean up our beaches and the port area. We have amazing natural resources in terms of tourism and recreation in Dublin, overshadowed by industry and pollution. Most cities are now making moves to rezone areas like this as recreational or commercial and moving industrial area out of city centres. We're doing the exact opposite which is really disappointing.

odyssey06 wrote: »

What's wrong with having a major port near you?
Apart from its incinerartor and the amount of valuable land it is tying up?

What exactly are the people of Dublin city having to "deal with it" at the moment?

Sorry...mixed up user names

Edited original reply...

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 11:29AM

PaulieC wrote: »

you complained about Nimbys and said that the whole thing should be moved to a different location. Why should some other location deal with your rubbish and your imports and exports ?

I don't think it's a helpful phrase to be honest. People can have valid objections to a development in their area, and concerns about the nature and design of the development, without it being NIMBYISM.

What is there to deal with - aside from the incinerator - about Dublin port, that any other coastal county on the eastern seaboard should complain about???
The implication of that would be that the people near the port in Dublin are having to put up with something you see...

It's not "your" imports and exports, the goods coming in and out of Dublin port are the imports and exports of half the country. So the question is where is it best placed.

And actually, the proposed new port of Drogheda would have been located at least partly within Dublin county boundaries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremore_Port

neris · 29-08-2017 11:32AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

"Transforming Dublin would be a millennial project and would take time but this is what great cities do: they build and they build for the future with a one hundred year vision."

Not dimissing the obstacles you have outlined, but it doesn't seem like McWilliams is suggesting short term solutions here...

As a very long term project yes it is very possible and yes in time would work with a bit of joined up thinking, long term planning and adjusting plans years down the line as things change but the problem with irish planning seems to be build for the "Now" and not plan for the long term future generations from now or even a decade or 2 away.

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 11:33AM

Simeon Deafening Clothespin wrote: »

I actually think it looks quiet nice coming in from sandymount.

ps I think it does look sleeker from the southside, looks more 'hunkered' or nestled in. On the northside we seem to see it rearing its 'backside'.

PaulieC · 29-08-2017 11:37AM

I think it's quite an impressive building

I am ambivalent about everything else about it though, from the way it was approved in a shambolic sort of way to the output of its chimneys.

Effects · 29-08-2017 11:52AM

odyssey06 wrote: »

How are they supposed to know it is steam?
They dont know it is steam... they expect most of those things at a port. They probably don't expect whats looks like a smoking power plant.

Have you ever been to any other ports anywhere else in the world?

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 11:57AM

Rooting around the official site I found this:
https://www.covantadublin.ie/About-the-Facility/How-Does-the-Facility-Work

Steam from the process is cooled, condensed back into water and returned to the boiler tubes, making it an efficient “closed loop” system.

Can someone explain then why the stacks are emitting steam if it's supposed to be a closed loop system???

Also, the website mentions that the incinerator uses "auxiliary fuel" to get the system up to 850 degrees for combustion... anyone know what this auxillary fuel source is???

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 11:59AM

Effects wrote: »

Have you ever been to any other ports anywhere else in the world?

I don't recall my view of Nice port being obscured by a constant steam\smoke stacks output...

Alun · 29-08-2017 12:04PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

I don't recall my view of Nice port being obscured by a constant steam\smoke stacks output...

The 'port' in Nice is basically a marina plus a berth for passenger ferries, cruise ships and floating gin palaces, not a commercial port in the sense that Dublin Port is. Not comparable at all.

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 12:19PM

Alun wrote: »

The 'port' in Nice is basically a marina plus a berth for passenger ferries, cruise ships and floating gin palaces, not a commercial port in the sense that Dublin Port is. Not comparable at all.

It will be when we move Dublin Port to Drogheda (ahem, sorry Balbriggan) and replace it with the nice looking marina though

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 12:25PM

OSI wrote: »

Or, just send the cruise liners to Dun Laoighre. Much more scenic, train right beside the marina, no incinerator, and we don't have to spend billions and cause massive disruption to the economy because you're worried a yank will get upset at the sight of a cloud.

Sorry what will additional billions be spent on and what is causing massive disruption to the economy???

A planned longterm switch to a new port - no reason for massive disruption.

No additional billions being spent - assuming there will be large developments in Dublin and environs for additional residential and commercial properties, the question is whether it makes more sense to place them where the port is or place them outside Dublin and then having people commute in from the environs.

TheChizler · 29-08-2017 12:47PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

Rooting around the official site I found this:
https://www.covantadublin.ie/About-the-Facility/How-Does-the-Facility-Work

Steam from the process is cooled, condensed back into water and returned to the boiler tubes, making it an efficient “closed loop” system.

Can someone explain then why the stacks are emitting steam if it's supposed to be a closed loop system???

Also, the website mentions that the incinerator uses "auxiliary fuel" to get the system up to 850 degrees for combustion... anyone know what this auxillary fuel source is???

The steam generated directly by the boiler needs to be condensed after passing through the turbine before it can be returned to the boiler (closed-loop). The steam you see is exhaust from a secondary system heated by the condenser, and this system is open-loop.

odyssey06 · 29-08-2017 12:49PM

OSI wrote: »

You reckon moving the entire infrastructure that encompasses Dublin port, updating all navigation and traffic management systems associated with getting naval traffic in and out of a port, all the legal resources including customs and coast guard and then completely gutting and rebuilding the entire port area as residential can be done for free and over night? Even moving just the fuel depot would be a monumental time and financial cost.

Where did anyone say it could be done over night??? Please find me that reference either in this thread or in any articles that were referenced about moving the port.

Nothing I have heard so far counts as 'massive disruption' to the economy in my book. I don't see it impacting growth %, GDP etc

Moving a fuel depot would be predicated on it being at worst a cost neutral move (although one would reasonably expect it to be revenue generating) ... the land it is sitting on is worth a factor of X (ten?) more than its destination land.

How does any city ever move to a new port if all the steps you have listed are insurmountable?
How does any new port ever become operational?
If Copenhagen et al can do it, Dublin should be able to also if it makes sense to do so.

Now maybe it made sense for those cities to move their port, and for specific reasons it wouldn't make sense for Dublin.
And maybe, even if it would make sense, we just don't think we have the wherewithal to pull it off...
But disagree with what's being proposed not a strawman version of it.

alastair · 29-08-2017 12:58PM

odyssey06 wrote: »

Where did anyone say it could be done over night??? Please find me that reference either in this thread or in any articles that were referenced about moving the port.

Nothing I have heard so far counts as 'massive disruption' to the economy in my book. I don't see it impacting growth %, GDP etc

Moving a fuel depot would be predicated on it being at worst a cost neutral move (although one would reasonably expect it to be revenue generating) ... the land it is sitting on is worth a factor of X (ten?) more than its destination land.

How does any city ever move to a new port if all the steps you have listed are insurmountable?
How does any new port ever become operational?
If Copenhagen et al can do it, Dublin should be able to also if it makes sense to do so.

Now maybe it made sense for those cities to move their port, and for specific reasons it wouldn't make sense for Dublin.
And maybe, even if it would make sense, we just don't think we have the wherewithal to pull it off...
But disagree with what's being proposed not a strawman version of it.

It would obviously cost billions. And you're still left with a local location for the generating and sewage treatment location for Dublin. White elephant comes to mind.

Poolbeg Incinerator

Comments