Closing Speech
As President-GEPEC Ecologists in Catalonia, organizer of these meetings, together with the Platform for the Defence of the Ebro and Catalonia Federation of Ecologists, tell me I have to make a closing address. But I tell you that the closing speech have already done all of you, have you done with all the conclusions of these roundtables, working groups and discussions that we conducted this weekend, a speech which has served to highlight what has long been suspected Catalan Countries:
1 - First, that the attacks on land and the environment have no political color or country, or cardinal points. Spread like wildfire through time and space are common and inexhaustible source of conflict. Show the serious discrepancy between civil society and political power. Show the chronic lack of dialogue, consultation and participation between the dominant power and organizations committed to the conservation area. Show volubilitat The Unbearable Lightness of being political, their double or triple language (according to election time, depending on the occupational position, according to county, depending on the forum ...). Altogether, a brilliant exercise in what politicians call it pragmatism, call ecologists and environmental adaptation ordinary people like me or you simply call hypocrisy, cynicism and chutzpah.
2 - Secondly, the sustainability of land and environmental health in PP.CC. shows the same symptoms or worse than the sustainability of our common language: a true slab on two essential pillars of our heritage, a shame that our politicians have been unable to defend the rights of primogeniture and the country have accepted too often the dish of lentils in exchange rules ambiguous, permissive, inconsistent and cowardly. Incontinence and the inconstancy of our government regulations have forgotten that, unlike them, nature will not ever break their rules and that sooner or later we will invoice.
3 - Thirdly, the recent history of Catalonia shows that in two years there has been no renewal policy renewal ideological background to ensure that the premises of sustainability, ecological balance and the precautionary principle transcend administrative technocracy and facing the development of the welfare criteria than those of pure and growth of economic activity and gross domestic product. Debates such as that occurred on transgenic plants and power lines in rural areas, waste management, pollution control, etc. ... demonstrate that we are far from a society governed by criteria of good ecological practices. Yet never until now has not been used in Catalonia an environmentalist lexicon so picturesque. Our jargon has become the official language of some Government departments. But this environmentally correct language, linked to these pompous autoqualicatius environmentalists of some members of government, has only vulgarised our messages and to discredit the word "organic" and "environmentalist" in both areas more radical and more conservative in .
4 - Fourth, any government around the PP.CC. has managed to change the most fundamental ways in order to appropriate institutional relationship with the environmental movements represent the territory. The highest Christian "who are not with me, you're against me" is still valid in Catalonia despite hopes for change. Discretion and tendentiousness that had marked the strategy of the CIU for 20 years in relations with civil society has continued.
Have used the system working as advocated that Susan George in her Lugano Report: "Allowing NGOs have consultative status in formal bodies that meet at regular intervals. It has been shown, said Susan George, this model is for NGOs to be more constructive and responsible, that is, much less radical, defiant and rebellious! ". Thus, in this way, has been promoted cronyism and institutional subvencional federations and groups related to the objectives of the government and the marginalization of those groups likely to cause social conflicts or support political decisions when developing clash of with full preservation of the land (a very special memories in this marginalization and this gap for the Government Delegate to the Tarragona region, Mr. Xavier Sabaté). We have also maintained the popular practice of wanting to buy our souls ghosts based projects, agreements utopian ethereal and monitoring committees have only been smoke and smoke! Simply because you have not seen the GEPEC or the Ecologists of Catalonia or the platforms they can cover the Southern mouth in exchange for money.
Concrete examples of this bad practice in policy might find around the country but we discuss the details in the field of action-GEPEC Ecologists in Catalonia (Terres de l'Ebre in Tarragona):
1 - We have seen political Left in procession to Flix ERCROSS saying that the company could not be responsible for a discharge occurring for decades due to lack of legislation (with a RDPH dating from 1987 and clearly establishes the prohibition of any contaminate the receiving environment).
2 - We hear politicians saying that the government of Catalonia ERCROS economic responsibilities of cleaning the river Ebro, threaten hundreds of jobs. I say this without blushing, while the company was engaged in buying ERCROS other chemical companies (Aragonesas) and allowed shareholders to exchange only win so far in 2005 102%. They know what this means, right? ERCROS that a shareholder in January was 20 million now has over 40, but the river Ebro probably have to pay together, we, of course.
3 - We hear illustrious politicians trumpeted the need for water conservation, new culture of water, dry ... and forgetting that these same politicians and their parties have been for years-and still-in Tarragona Province allowing you to have a shameless promotion of free golf clubs! The Council has done this for years: some golf courses that have shown that meridianament but are not covered by legal and urbanized rural area here in our counties are authorized by the Catalan Water Agency for the use ( and abuse) of groundwater wells (water and sewage!).
4 - We have also referred to as the dismal failure of the municipal waste management has pushed the government to revive, or baptized, or revive, those facilities put into question from the opposition easy: landfills (as of Tivissa or Village) gasifier (Mora), metanitzadores (A Botarell and Tarragona), incineration in cement (Alcanar, etc.). Even just the lack of political courage to stretch your ears and a good number of sanction incompetent mayors (most of his own party) that have the necessary means to reduce and recycle waste generated by its citizens.
5 - Finally (for what followed?) Have seen tons and tons of energy inconsistency in the Tarragona region (not go to Bescanó). So, we saw amazed at the striking presence of our three nuclear plants, have added two stations in Tarragona, has approved the construction of another thermal Vandellòs, being asked to do another thermal Ribarroja ... and not to mention a hundred projects of wind farms around our coastline, mountains and plains. Tarragona is it that we spend a lot of light to meet our shame!
If we conclude that any renewal policy has led, does not entail a right to renew the relationship between the environment and human beings, we have no choice but to conclude that through this conference we see the need to build an ecological network of PPCC in defense of the territory to coordinate all those who are fighting to preserve the environment (platforms, environmental groups ...). We should reflect on the prolifera-liferació indiscriminate grupúsculs, platforms and local entities such as short-term resolution of their problem and enhance coordination of efforts and of logistics infrastructure and human permanent.
No choice but we have to assume that social pressure, the public report, the cry! ... is the only language that the political class is willing to listen. But we pressed, report, call ... with CASE! With serious arguments, the weight of scientific reports, with the knowledge and use of appropriate laws and administrative procedures, technical data, ecological studies with rigorous ... Because although we hear the cry is for politicians, because we hear ARGUMENTS serve society and we respect your country.
Tortosa, 28 May 2005 Damien Vernet and Barceló GEPEC-Chairman of EDC
27 May 2005. Press Release
Currently, and for months, the heat of "splinters" of Sant Pere de Torello it is burning a lot number and diversity of materials, as you can see everyone who approaches it. A plastic timber of any kind are added, PBC, polystyrene, plywood, plastic, melamine, fiberglass, varnishes, textile fibers, etc.. combustion of which is highly polluting.
For months, the Department of Environment advised, with a rich story with graphics done on 10 December 2004 that the platform was reached, dated December 16 and, somewhat later, Also in an interview with the Department on 26 January 2005. Days later, on February 7, and in the course of an interview, this report was send to the company CESPA, the main group of companies that make SL HILL., Manager and developer of thermal Project to which the platform opposes.
Since then nothing has changed. Every day that the fuel temperature reaches remained the same, and so to the present.
The committee of the current thermal Sant Pere de Torello not met since December 2002, despite repeated requests from the Platform Antiincineradora representative on this committee.
In view of this, on 27 April 2005, they were lifting a affidavit that includes some of the materials used in the heat at this time.
With the desire to redress the situation and that the thermal function properly and to inform those who should control what is burning, dated May 20, we sent a copy of the affidavit to the Director of Environment and Housing, Mr Salvador Milan, the Minister of Health, Marina Geli, and to date, also the Prosecutor for the Environment considers that if there are intervening.
We question, once again, the credibility that we can earn the group of companies that currently manage the thermal and seek to build and manage a facility ten times bigger next to this.
ANTIINCINERADORA PLATFORM OF THE VALLEY OF GES
Congratulations!
The company Global Peak 3, SLU has decided to build a power station gas combined cycle in the municipalities of populations and Mariola Beneixama tubs. In a letter to the Department of Environmental Quality and Assessment of the Ministry of Environment, responsible for the company justified its decision "the opposition have said that the councils involved in the project" and the position against many organizations in the area.
The resignation of the project promoters has been the effect of the power of mobilization of the town of Alcoyano, and the High Vinalopó Albaida Vall del
; of organized civil society in a Coordinator anticentral made by individuals, groups, institutions, associations, foundations, schools, parties, unions, groups, etc.., and the pressure on the Council of Alicante in the Valencian Parliament and to the Congress by various political parties.
In recent months, from the web notermica.org Coordinator of the Central Anti-Thermal Baths Beneixama has repeatedly encouraged the citizens to fight the proposed power station because, according to the Coordinator, it was "possible influence final decision by the promoters of public pressure. "
Of
What is happening with the thermal? The continuing threat
On March 16 City Hall Sant Pere de Torello disseminated fanfare, the company CERRO SL. has requested termination of the contract.
On March 21 Platform Antiincineradora the valley of Ges request confirmation of this news at the Department of Environment and Housing, the municipality of Sant Pere de Torello and Company Hill. SL.
The Council says the company requested retire, but said if the council has accepted this resignation.
SL HILL. not want to leave unless a major counterparty, with a specification agreed that a solution is difficult.
The Department of Environment and Housing (Environment Ministry), that is who should resolve the environmental permit for the project presented HILL LTD., We have not responded so far, but the Minister Salvador Milan explains that the negotiations are between SL HILL. and the Department continue and that his intention is to authorize a biomass plant, all kinds of biomass, which also to export electricity.
Given this confusion, the Platform Antiincineradora insists that, under current circumstances, we have an opportunity to make a new thermal only forest biomass and dimension provided only to service water health and heating of Sant Pere de Torello. That is, a plant as have expressed the councils of the valley of Ges, the District Council Agenda XXI and filmed the Strategic Plan of the valley of Ges, and Orís Bisaura.
In the absence of information that is released by the Environment Ministry and the statements of a central that provides electricity, hot water and heating in the whole valley of Ges, we fear that what we want to conclude by Sant Pere de Torello is a macrocentral all reject.
Now more than ever must be alert to the development of these negotiations between companies, council Sant Pere de Torello and Department of Environment and Housing.
Now more than ever we believe that dialogue and transparency should be imposed, if you want to find feasible solutions for all parties involved in the conflict.
WHAT THE CURRENT HEAT CREAM OF SAN
Currently the heat of Sant Pere de Torello, as seen in the pictures that accompany this text and as anyone who approaches it can be observed directly, burning large quantities and a variety of waste.
A plastic timber being added all sorts pbcs, polystyrene, plastic coated chipboard, melamine, fiberglass, vernissats, textile fibers, etc.. combustion of which is highly polluting.
We wonder how this company that is proposing a large facility in Sant Pere de Torello, it will ensure respect for and strict adherence to established fuel licensing activities, if not able to fulfill it now in a much smaller plant?
What credibility deserves this group of companies? Can leave in your hands the future of our health and environment of the valley of Ges?
The Department of Environment and Housing is aware of this situation for months. Up to now, has any control or inspection. Negligence that endangers the health of the inhabitants of the valley. What credibility can be controlled in future by a company multiplied by ten the size of the thermal current.
WHY A MILLS, IA SAINT YES
Not understand the commitment of the Department of Environment and Housing to promote a large facility in Sant Pere de Torello when, with a simple remodeling of existing thermal and burning too few tons of forest biomass to solve the heating of 450 users and people would be profitable.
The example is in Molins de Rei, with a thermal model is presented as sustainable by the same administration. This gives hot water and heating to 680 dwellings and uses only 2200 tons. year exclusively for forestry and agricultural biomass (almond shells, nuts, olive ...) and natural gas consumption peaks.
Thus it can ensure the availability of forest biomass over time, as this is not readily available in larger quantities.
In San Pedro we run the risk that, under the pretext of a macroplanta biomass burning is finished, as now, all kinds of waste, some of them, highly polluting, given the limited availability of forest biomass.
Why does not the Department is committed to the path of Molins de Rei in Sant Pere de Torello? Surely that would solve the heating of the people and satisfy everyone.
How can a question that seems so common sense is not carried out? How should we interpret the attitude of the Environment Ministry (Ministry of Environment)? What is behind all this?
It is not that there are other economic-interest-in this matter that drive the creation of a large plant with several excuses (recovery, Kyoto, ..)?
In energy recovery incinerator plant?
Recently, the Environment Minister, Salvador Milan, said in
En un lloc amb inversió tèrmica i boires persistents que dificulten la dispersió dels gasos, prop d'un PEIN (Bellmunt), desaconsellat pels tècnics per implementar-hi instal·lacions amb emissions contaminants, ens preguntem com la Conselleria pot pensar que és el lloc idoni per a una planta que exporti electricitat i autoritzar-hi una biomassa tan diversa que contamini i posi en perill la salut de les persones.
“Valoritzar energèticament” els residus que contaminen no és acceptable.. Es pot valoritzar la llum del sol, el vent o la geotèrmia, però no podem valoritzar els residus industrials perquè no es pot “valoritzar” la salut de les persones.
Aquest projecte no respon tampoc a cap mapa energètic nacional, amb arguments que responguin a factors tècnics, climàtics, ambientals i socials, ja que ara per ara no existeix.
No s'entén l'obstinació del Departament en promoure una gran planta a Sant Pere quan, amb una simple remodelació de la tèrmica existent i cremant molt poques tones de biomassa forestal se solucionaria la calefacció dels 450 usuaris del poble .
L'exemple el tenim a Molins de Rei, amb una tèrmica que és presentada com a model per la mateixa administració. Aquesta dona aigua calenta i calefacció a 680 habitatges i utilitza únicament 2.200 tm per any de biomassa exclusivament forestal i agrícola (closques d'ametlles, avellanes, pinyolada...) i gas natural en puntes de consum.
Per què el Departament no aposta per aquesta via a Sant
No serà que hi ha altres interessos –econòmics- en aquest afer que impulsen la creació d'una gran planta amb diversos pretextos (valorització, Kioto,..)?
Esperem - l'esperança és la darrera cosa que es perd- que finalment el seny s'imposi.
NOTA DE PREMSA DE LA PLATAFORMA ANTIINCINERADORA 29 de març de 2005
Davant del comunicat de l'ajuntament de Sant Pere de Torelló en que anuncia que CERR SL ha demanant resoldre el contracte en no poder tirar endavant el projecte que va presentar a avaluació ambiental el 2002 i que la Generalitat proposava autoritzar si bé amb algunes modificacions pel que fa al combustible, la Plataforma Antiincineradora de la Vall del Ges vol fer constar:
1. La Plataforma sol·licitarà, tant al Departament de Medi Ambient, com al grup d'empreses CERR SL, com a l'ajuntament de Sant Pere de Torelló, informació més concreta, ja que considera que la informació donada és insuficient i que deixa molts interrogants i punts foscos per aclarir.
2. No cal dir que aquesta notícia, si es confirmés, donaria un tomb significatiu al conflicte que fa quatre anys que dura. Estaríem davant d'una ocasió única per tal de reconduir-lo i arribar a una solució que passaria inexcusablement per proveir Sant Pere d'un servei de calefacció col·lectiva dimensionat per a aquesta única necessitat i que utilitzés com a combustible exclusivament biomassa forestal.
3. Per endegar aquest procés la Plataforma reclama a les administracions i empreses implicades la màxima transparència i el màxim diàleg per tal que la solució definitiva pugui ser assumida per la societat de la vall.
4.- Ara més que mai la Plataforma es mobilitzarà per tal que el sentit comú i la responsabilitat en la presa de decisions s'imposin i vigilarà per tal no es tornin a prendre decisions unilaterals que divideixin la població i amenacin la salut pública i el medi ambient de la vall del Ges.
NOTA DE PREMSA DE LA PCRR 31 de març de 2005
A la reunió mantinguda ahir entre el Conseller de Medi Ambient, la secretària general del Dep. de Medi
In the first intervention was an explanation of the approaches PCRR exposed to the Declaration of Crossroads, they denounced the policy of continuity of the Environment Ministry, the lack of specific policies and effective prevention and improvement and extension of results recovery of waste selective collection, as well as the use being made demagogic and misleading aspects of the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol to replace conventional fuels for waste facilities such as cement or thermal plants. Also did you get the value of PCRR and amendments to draft bills and regulatory waste of tax (see the attached press release).
The bodies of PCRR also stressed that the current administration uses the same speech that the previous administration when it wanted to debunk and discredit organizations and citizens / positions to be developed or opposition to projects in the pipeline.
In a second round buig inertizate restauracdsffsdfdffreres for ... as a substitute for traditional landfills. As for conflicts condf sent to
The perception of the collective output of the meeting was of disappointment and concern at the fact that the current administration is not sufficiently sensitive to the demands of citizens or bold enough to move forward lines truly preventative and sustainable management of
Amendments to the draft amendment of the Law Regulating waste 6/1993 and the draft Law on financing of infrastructure and the tax treatment of waste at the waste disposal
The bodies of the Federation of Ecologists of Catalonia (Ecologists in Catalonia), we think that the review of the legal framework for waste in Catalonia incorporates certain criteria moose a sustainable waste management and prevention that we miss, because it does clear that waste management in our country has entered a clear stagnation and decline to make an important point.
SUMMARY OF THE DMAH Amendment (Department of Environment and Housing)
. 1. The amendment of the law uses to set targets to reduce, reuse and economic and fiscal measures to encourage waste minimization and clean production. We therefore propose that the Government develop a one-year period a Catalan Waste Reduction Act.
2. Although the law itself 11/2000 regulating the burning brand of harmonizing the two laws had not been taken into account. We propose to collect all the articles of the Law regulating the incineration of 11/2000.
3. It must always apply the principles of Community law of proximity and adequacy of facilities for treatment and recovery of waste, so we propose the withdrawal of the wording of Article 13 which states that "The recovery of waste will have priority against the principles of sufficiency and proximity "and replaced by a wording which endorses the need to respect the criterion of proximity in the construction of facilities for preventive treatment.
4. Should incorporate the criteria, means and objectives to minimize waste and hazardous waste that has not already been raised clear objectives.
5. The proposal to declare the final treatment facilities for public use is very dangerous because it creates a defenseless neighbors, beyond the inclusion of the expropriation. All this can lead to social conflict. We propose the withdrawal of Article 14. 3:
6. Still apply to the obligation of delivery of the form a separate all Catalan municipalities. We propose that the law obliges clearly separated from the delivery form and other materials likely to recover materials to all municipalities and that includes a scheduling of these obligations.
7. Be incorporated into the collection center service mandatory for all municipalities.
8. Tables should be created broad regional representation office in the territory:
9. The government must develop a comprehensive program to coordinate all actions necessary, after consultation with and agreement of all the stakeholders in each area (vegueria zoning or land).
10. Expand the functions of the ARC to support municipalities to implement the Act.
Proposed modifications to the draft Law on measures for financing infrastructure will reside treatment
1. Should not only finance new infrastructure but also improvements to existing
2. Should ensure that they cover the additional costs of different models of waste management. There are models for collection and management that are not covered all the additional costs; appropriate model and Minimum Waste collection system door to door, asking that the law be made explicit that this additional cost will be covered without exception [1] pursuant to state law 11/1997, April 24 (Ley Packaging and Packaging Waste).
3. You must ensure that efforts in a greater recovery of municipal waste is rewarded. The proposal to amend the law does not establish specific criteria to follow in order to distribute resources. Since the federation calls for the criteria to be followed is the generation of smaller and greater recovery of waste materials, excluding the energy recovery (incineration) of the concept of recovery. Here we should add that not be returned to the municipalities 25% + to be improper and redistribute the best return + to improve separate collection at source and - the contaminants
4. Ecologists from Catalonia to propose establishing the charges for end treatments have a gradual growth in the coming years. Also need to set a special value for those municipalities in 2005 have not yet deployed the separation of form in 15 per tonne [2] .
5. Consider, also, that affirmative action for incineration is unacceptable given the environmental and health impacts that have, suggest that the amount is equal to the spill (10 € / tonne)
6. As for construction waste, the rate is fixed at 3 per tonne of waste going to the store. Consider that the amount is adequate but, as in the case of municipal waste, which should be increased gradually propose an annual increase of € 1 to the goals of PROGROC. Subsequently updated at least according to the CPI Catalan.
From the Federation of Ecologists understand that Catalonia should not allocate any funds from the concept improvements in existing tanks and incinerators, as this concept should be considered in outsourcing costs and the final system 'should take the users of these facilities. It also contradicted the spirit of this Act is to encourage the recovery of shape and set fractions of waste treatment systems and penalize finalist.
LETTER FROM THE GROUP OF DEFENSE MINISTER OF THE ENVIRONMENT IN TER
The GDT answer some statements by the Minister of Environment on the heat of St. Peter
Author: Group of Defence Ter (GDT) - Date: 2/3/2005
Borrowing, on 29 February 2005
Mr. Counselor:
Per la present i en relació a afirmacions fetes per part seva en declaracions efectuades al 9 Nou del 25 de febrer sobre la tèrmica de St. Pere de Torelló, i malgrat coincidir amb el seu departament respecte a la necessitat de modernitzar la instal·lació, així com en la oportunitat de recuperar energia de residus orgànics, ens veiem en el deure de precisar que:
La nostra Entitat ha viscut amb desànim la confusió creada per la pèssima Resolució de la Generalitat respecte el projecte de CERR. En aquest document, estudiat minuciosament per la Plataforma Antiincineradora, s'obre la possibilitat a la producció de biogàs, però incomprensiblement alhora, s'hi enumeren les condicions del tractament tèrmic d'un seguit de productes ( enumerats en el famós apartat b.7 ) dels quals cap de les parts afectades havia fet ni tant sols esment.
Per altra part, des de el Grup de Defensa del Ter, considerem del tot essencial que en qualsevol de les propostes que s'aportin en un futur, s'exigeixi que l'energia o energies primàries utilitzades a la tèrmica, siguin del tot renovables. És a dir, que la tèrmica de St. Pere, no sigui una excusa per cremar residus reciclables, combustibles fòssils, ni evidentment convertir-se en incineradora de residus orgànics o potencialment contaminants.
Caldrà per tant en un futur, saber quines son les prioritats del seu govern, i en especial, en un pròxim projecte, deixar clàrs aspectes tant decisius com son: el dimensionalment de la instal·lació segons les necessitats de la població, els combustibles primaris a utilitzar, i les possibilitats de generació d'energia a partir de renovables.
De segur que tots coincidim en la necessitat de construir sistemes de generació d'energia més nets i eficients que els del passat, i per tant hem de ser capaços d'explicar-los amb la claredat i transparència suficients.
Restant a la seva disposició, el saluda atentament
GRUP DE DEFENSA DEL TER
Rafael Garrido i Alcalá
President de l'entitat
CARTA A L'OPINIÓ PÚBLICA ( de 186 ciutadans)
28 de febrer de 2005
PER QUÈ UNA INCINERADORA A SANT PERE DE TORELLÓ?
La vall del Ges, subcomarca de la Plana de Vic, fa molts mesos que està revoltada. Als greus problemes ecològics que la nostra comarca pateix, purins, fonts contaminades, destrucció d'espais naturals, se li ve ara a sumar un altre que ha despertat el rebuig unànime de la seva gent. Es vol substituir una tèrmica que dona aigua calenta i calefacció al poble de Sant Pere de Torelló per una gran incineradora de residus que s'instal·laria a la vall amb l'excusa de millorar aquest servei.
El projecte inicial del grup d'empreses que encapçala CESPA, que és una gestora de residus, preveu cremar 90.0000 tones anuals de residus industrials, és a dir, multiplicar per deu l'actual tèrmica.
Incinerar residus, que sembla una solució fàcil i neta, és en realitat una tècnica rebutjada avui pels ecologistes de tot el món. La incineració diposita al sòl un munt de contaminants (dioxines i furans) de manera totalment incontrolada i que acaben passant, per la cadena alimentària, al'ésser humà.
A més, cal afegir que la nostra zona, la Plana de Vic, pateix una inversió tèrmica molt considerable, especialment a l'hivern, amb boires persistents, que impedeix la dispersió dels gasos.
La inadequació i desproporció d'aquest projecte és notòria. Només per importants interessos econòmics es pot entendre la seva autorització. Per citar un exemple direm que a Molins de Rei hi ha una planta que funciona bàsicament amb biomassa forestal i que subministra també calefacció i aigua calenta a una barriada de 680 habitatges. Cada any s'hi cremen 2.280 tm.
Si comparem les dades resulta que pel mateix servei a Molins de Rei per cada família es cremen 3.352 Kg /any, mentre que a Sant Pere de Torelló , amb 450 usuaris, la proposta és de cremar-ne 200.000 kg. per any i família, és a dir, 66,6 vegades més.
Our community has spoken clearly and supplies for a plant designed and dimensioned "only" to solve the heating and hot water of Sant Pere de Torello and a fuel such as "biomass EXCLUSIVELY FOREST" So the County Council have expressed Vic, the town of Vall del Ges, except Sant Pere de Torello is the project developer., XXI Agenda of the Strategic Plan of the Vall del Ges, and Orís Bisaura 9 that includes the nearby municipalities, other municipalities the Osona and many mayors and councilors of different political signs., and a long list of environmental organizations in the country, many individual firms and civic organizations, claims the project, a series of demonstrations and manifestos to show it.
At present and for too long the Department of Environment and Housing's hands the environmental authorization of this huge project. The Department suggests that there will be a new project. He speaks of a thermal biomass. Who built this plant, the Department? In addition, the proposed biomass characterization is sufficiently vague as to be also potentially dangerous. Also places limits on the size of the project. Moreover, we know that the company would carry out the project start, as though the environment is not clearly decided to deny it. And we ask: What weighs more then the unanimous cry of the people affected and their organizations and democratic institutions, or economic interests of the company group and a single voice in the council that "business" of the table salvation of their debts?
If the incinerator is put into operation not only lose the health of residents and filmed around, but be a step backwards in the waste management policy that must be resolutely directed towards a real reduction, reuse and recycle these.
And they also suffer from some political credibility before the people of Osona. Who think that concepts like ecology may be only a veneer of a decorator real lack of ideology in the hands of those seconds.
Moses Company and Horses (still 185 more signatures)
MEAT PLANT SLURRY AND WASTES
published by Segre yesterday and today (8 and 9 December 2004) the government wants the new treatment plants also burn manure and dead animals from slaughterhouse waste than MER.
Imagine for a moment that flew ue that Grefacsa Bio-Sereca lost the monopoly of issue: Grefacsa dixaria come to pat the filth that comes in now.
But note well: Even the government has approved an extension of GREFACSA.
The platform has always said that the type of machinery which is incorporated Grefacsa incineration since 2001 does not correspond to a hidrolització corpses, but that machine is waste incineration.
Note well: when you want the bodies to go elsewhere, let Grefacsa enlarge. Why? So why Grefacsa is no longer a manufacturing plant for animal feed and has licensed its activities, but has become a hazardous waste incineration plant.
(Except www.incineradora.tk , Web Platform Antiincineradora of DDE in Grefacsa Térmens, highly recommended site)
MANIFESTO medical professionals on the incineration of animal fats
WASTE OF PELIGROSOS cremation? VALE PREVENT MORE ...
“El diagnóstico médico más preciso es el que emana de la autopsia, pero seguramente el interesado habría preferido un diagnóstico a medias y una terapia a tiempo.”
Ramón Folch.
Los efectos sobre la salud y el medio ambiente de muchos de los nuevos contaminantes ambientales van siendo conocidos muy recientemente y lamentablemente en ocasiones sólo después de accidentes o catástrofes.
Así nuestra sociedad ha ido tomando lentamente conciencia de los riesgos derivados de la contaminación ambiental por dioxinas especialmente después de la “crisis de los pollos belgas” y la afectación de la cadena alimentaria a partir de la contaminación de los piensos por estas sustancias organocloradas a comienzos de 1999.
Instituciones internacionales como la ONU se plantean ya a partir del Convenio de Estocolmo firmado en Mayo de 2001 la “minimización continua de las dioxinas entre otros organoclorados y cuando sea viable su eliminación final” debido a su alta peligrosidad derivada de su carácter bioacumulativo, altamente persistente y su capacidad ya demostrada de favorecer el desarrollo de procesos cancerosos en humanos además de su capacidad para afectar al sistema inmunitario que nos defiende de las infecciones y de muchos tipos de cáncer y de afectar el equilibrio hormonal al actuar como disruptores endocrinos.
Las dioxinas ya fueron “famosas” muy anteriormente, en 1976 , cuando sucedió el accidente de Seveso, en Italia, que obligó a desalojar a cientos de personas de la zona afectada, al igual que sucedió en Times Beach , Missouri. Fueron conocidas también por los efectos que aún se manifiestan, varias generaciones después, en los vietnamitas que sufrieron el bombardeo con el llamado “agente naranja” un herbicida organoclorado contaminado con dioxinas y en los propios soldados norteamericanos que lo utilizaron.
La presencia de dioxinas en el medio ha aumentado extraordinariamente a partir de la revolución industrial. No se producen voluntariamente, no tienen ninguna utilidad industrial ni comercial pero siempre que se dé una combustión de materia orgánica en presencia de cloro se generan dioxinas. Su producción aumenta en presencia de algunos metales como cobre y cinc que actúan como catalizadores en el proceso de formación de estas substancias.
En España y en Europa Occidental la principal fuente de dioxinas son la incineración de residuos y la industria de reciclaje de metales.
En el mencionado Convenio de Estocolmo las cementeras que incineran residuos se incluyeron entre las cuatro fuentes más importantes de emisión de dioxinas.
La incineración en una cementera de residuos como aceites usados vegetales y minerales, fuel blending, residuos de fragmentación de vehículos, lodos de depuradora y neumáticos, producirá inevitablemente emisión de dioxinas y metales pesados.
Las dioxinas que se forman en la incineración parece que efectivamente pueden descomponerse si se superan los 850 º C de temperatura en el proceso de combustión, con un tiempo de residencia de los gases de dos segundos a dicha temperatura y manteniendo turbulencia durante la combustión, pero todo indica que vuelven a formarse por recombinación de los elementos procedentes de la combustión al descender la temperatura a 250 a 400 º C en las fases de emisión, tanto en la propia chimenea como en el penacho de los gases emitidos. Esto ha sido comprobado al medir no sólo las emisiones tras la combustión sino también las inmisiones de dioxinas en las zonas próximas a las incineradoras.
Las dioxinas, no se disuelven en el agua pero sí tienen afinidad por las grasas en las que permanecen durante muchos años ya que son muy lentamente degradables. Su vida media, el tiempo que tardan en reducir su concentración en un 50 % en el organismo humano, es de seis a diez años. En los suelos pueden persistir durante varias décadas y se difunden ampliamente.
Su mayor peligro para la salud, al margen de la exposición aguda accidental, deriva de su capacidad para incorporarse a la cadena alimentaria. Al acumularse en las grasas animales, aún encontrándose en pequeñísimas proporciones inicialmente, van alcanzando concentraciones progresivamente mayores a medida que se avanza en la cadena alimentaria, al final de la cual nos encontramos los seres humanos.
En la cadena alimentaria acuática por ejemplo se ha conocido recientemente que en pescados como el salmón las dioxinas alcanzan concentraciones varios millones de veces superiores a las inicialmente existentes en el medio acuático.
En la cadena alimentaria terrestre se ha podido comprobar el alto poder de acumulación en los alimentos grasos en las cercanías de incineradoras de residuos sólidos urbanos de varios lugares de Europa, en1989 en Rinjmond, Rotterdam, y más recientemente, en 1998, en las cercanías de las incineradoras de Lille, al norte de París. En ambos casos se pudo observar que la leche de las vacas que pastaban en la zona contenía concentraciones muy superiores a las consideradas entonces admisibles y debió procederse a prohibir la comercialización de la leche y derivados lácteos, quesos, etc. durante varios años.
La vía alimentaria es actualmente la principal forma de incorporar dioxinas a nuestro organismo. El 95 % de las dioxinas penetran de esta forma, especialmente junto a alimentos ricos en grasas como los lácteos, el pescado y la carne.
Aunque ya se conocía que las dioxinas producían cáncer en animales de experimentación, hasta mediados de los 90 no se reconoció su capacidad para producir cáncer en el ser humano. En su informe de Septiembre de 1994 la USEPA (Agencia para la Protección del Medio Ambiente de Estados Unidos) reconoció que las dioxinas producen cáncer en humanos, que a dosis inferiores a las asociadas con cáncer ocasionan alteraciones en los sistemas inmunitario, reproductor y endocrino, que los fetos y embriones de peces, aves, mamíferos y seres humanos son muy sensibles a sus efectos tóxicos y que no existe un nivel seguro de exposición a las dioxinas.
El conocimiento de los riesgos que las dioxinas suponen para la salud es como puede verse todavía muy reciente y preocupan especialmente los efectos en el desarrollo neuroconductual e inmunitario de los niños debidos a su exposición en la vida intrauterina, ya que se ha podido comprobar su capacidad para atravesar las barrera placentaria y llegar al feto durante la gestación. También pueden llegar en concentraciones importantes al recién nacido con la leche materna durante la lactancia.
A medida que se ha ido avanzando en su conocimiento se ha ido reduciendo la “Ingesta Diaria Tolerable”(IDT). Así en 1990 la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) fijó una IDT de 10 picogramos-TEQ por kilo de peso al día (un picogramo es una billonésima de gramo:0´000000000001 gramo). La IDT es la “Dosis máxima que se puede considerar no perjudicial para la salud humana en exposiciones prolongadas”. Ocho años después, en 1998, la propia OMS recomendó que no se sobrepasara la ingesta de 1 a 4 picogramos -TEQ/Kg/día. En Estados Unidos en cambio la USEPA fijó la Ingesta Diaria Tolerable en 0´006 pg-TEQ/Kg/día, una dosis 160 veces menor que la IDT recomendada por la OMS y 1660 veces menor que la fijada ocho años antes.
En determinadas exposiciones a contaminantes medioambientales resulta sumamente dificultoso llegar a establecer una relación causal entre la aparición de un efecto en salud y la exposición previa a determinado contaminante. Los efectos pueden producirse muy diferidos en el tiempo, muchos años después, especialmente cuando se trata de exposiciones a pequeñas concentraciones acumulativas como es el caso que nos ocupa. Se da además una exposición a múltiples contaminantes ya sus interacciones y determinadas enfermedades son de etiología múltiple.
Pero es en estas situaciones especialmente complejas cuando parece más oportuno adoptar el llamado “Principio de Precaución” .Tal como concluyeron en 1998 los expertos estadounidenses firmantes de la Declaración de Wingspread: “cuando una actividad amenace con daños para la salud humana o el medio ambiente deben tomarse medidas precautorias aun cuando no haya sido científicamente determinada en su totalidad la posible relación de causa-efecto”.
El Principio de Precaución viene a decir que es mejor prevenir que curar, actuar anticipándose a los problemas incluso en ausencia de una prueba concluyente del daño.
10 de Mayo de 2004
Mario Fernández López de Ahumada
Médico, Master en Atención Sanitaria al Medio Ambiente por la UPNA
Asociación para la Defensa de la Salud Pública
El presente escrito está avalado por los siguientes profesionales médicos de la Sanidad, pertenecientes a todos los ámbitos de la misma, desde Medicina de Familia y Ambulatoria a la Medicina Hospitalaria y profesorado de nuestra Facultad:
1.José Manuel Martínez Fernández
2.José Francisco Santos Sainz
3.Eduardo Velo Matarrubia
4.Silvia Rioja Zarrabeitia
5.Ezequiel Sainz Gómez
6.Fernando Andrés Mantecón
7.Consuelo Amo Fernández
8.Araceli Echezarreta Gato
9.Guillermo Santamaria Cabrillo
10.Carmen Cubas García
11.Olga Flor Rebanal
12.Ascensión Jorrín Moreno
13.Victoria Viota González
14.José A. García del Río
15.José Francisco Nistal
16.Mª Luisa Valcuende
17.Alicia Gómez
18.Alberto Cadiñanos Marco-Gardoqui
19.Teresa Martínez Merino
20.Noemí Camus Fernández
21.Alberto Velasco Elechiguerra
22.Mario Castañeda Riestra
23.Rosario Martínez Hernández
24.Mar Masa Calvo
25.Carmen Silva González
26.Jesús Cagigas Viadero
27.Juan Manzanal Dueñas
28.Teresa Marco de Lucas
29.Jesús Moran Sánchez
30.José Villar Bao,
31.Belén Martinez-Herrera Merino
32.Emilio Lara Valdivielso
33.Mercedes Royano Ruiz
34.Susana Rodriguez Rua
35.Elena Basabe Blanco
36.Mónica Domínguez Santamaría
37.José Miguel Ángel Manteca
38.Francisco Gómez Da Casa
39.J. Domingo Álvarez González
40.Cristina Luzuriaga Tomas
41.Ignacio Ortuzar Guillamón
42.Andrés González Tutor
43.José Cifrian Martínez
44.Juan M. Hurlé
45.Monserrat Fernández Calderón
46.Nuria Torre Pérez
47.Vanessa Zuzarte Luis
48.Sonia Pérez Mantecón
49.Charo Carpizo Alfayate
50.Fernando Rivera Herrero
51.Marta F. López-Brea Ladera
52.Joaquín de la Peña García
53.Marta Velasco Zarzosa
54.Antonio Jiménez Gómez
55.José Luis Hervas Fernández
56.Efrén de la Serna
57.Dolores Mediavilla Aguado
58.Carmen Vázquez Olaiz
59.Emilio J. Sánchez Barceló
60.Mar San Martín Díez de Terán
61.Samuel Cos Corral
62.Carolina Alonso González
63.Mª Teresa Berciano Blanco
64.Trinidad Dierssen Sotos
65.Rebeca González Paredes
66.José Herrera Cossio
67.Mª José A. Fernández
68.Alejandra Carvajal
69.Mª del Mar García Pérez
70.Verónica Gómez Amigo
71.Isabel Incera Alvear
72.Juan Pablo Hernando García
73.Estrella Quintela Obregón
74.Benedicto Gutiérrez Escalada
75.José Luis Miñambres Bardiñas
76.Mercedes Misiego Peral
77.Roberto Zambeitia Puente
78.Dolores González Soria
79.Gonzalo Pare Alonso
80.Miguel Gallegos Cuesta
81.Mª Luisa Valiente
82.Alonso García
83.Marian Fernández Terán
84.Rafael Tejido García
85.Francisco Novo Robledo
86.Luis Iglesias Oliva
87.Olga Acha Zalaza
88.José Andrés Herrán Gómez
89.J. García Porrero
90.Pablo Corral Collantes
91.Carmelo Morales Angulo
92.Ángel de la Mora
93.Jesús M. García Mantilla
94.África Mediavilla.
(Tret de www.incineradora.tk )