Incinerator would not provide home energy

TED CROSBIE (Letters, July 14) welcomes an incinerator in Ringaskiddy. He tells us of the virtues of an almost magical sounding proposal where we would all be provided with recycled energy.

However, his dreamlike scenario is not what is proposed at Ringaskiddy. He refers to some sort of underwater tunnel where the energy would be distributed to homes. That was never part of Indaver’s plans.

He also conveniently forgets about the second incinerator proposed at Ringaskiddy — a facility which would mean the importation of toxic waste from mainland Europe.

This toxic waste incinerator would be hugely profitable for the company at the expense of Cork harbour residents, animals and tourism. Hundreds of thousands of tonnes of toxic waste would be imported into Cork from Europe and beyond. It would be burnt under our noses, distributing billions of toxins into our environment.

The poisonous ash left over would then end up in local landfills and we would be back to square one. Incineration is no miracle. If you burn anything, smoke goes up into the atmosphere and ash is left over. If you burn something toxic, the same will apply.

Roger Ellis

59 Chandlers Walk

Rushbrooke

Cobh

Co Cork