by allaboardtheskylark » 26 Feb 2010, 15:22
Firstly, let me state I am against the VIRIDOR proposal. I think it is a pack it, stack it, burn it and call it carbon capture scheme. Uninventive, costly and profitable only for VIRIDOR. It does nothing to attack the problems our waste production is causing the environment.
It leaves no room for expansion IF new methods of sorting waste for further processing are developed VIRIDOR will not be able to react to new demands on a constrained site, but...
The CEC seem to be in a difficult position, applying planning regs, and having to develop a waste strategy for the whole city. Imagine the fuss by BRA's if their buckets did not get lifted for a couple of weeks, or if they were forced legally, to say, half their waste production. So it is not easy or surprising the CEC may be sending a mixed message to campaigners.
Also, it is easy to say send it to Millerhill if you don't live there.
The question I have, for anybody who feels up to replying, is how much damage VIRIDOR have done to their appeal. Many of the "facts" they produced appear to have been manipulated to suit an end result. They seemed to stumble at times through their own facts and figures. I was surprised at how poorly they came across and I must say I am not biased as I am not a mad keen PONGER.
To start with I thought they were very strong favourites to win the appeal, now I am not so sure. I have gone for 1/4 (thats odds on) to even money.
Anyone bold enough to make a prediction?