Alleged Illegalities in Poolbeg Incinerator Process: Bribery & Incineration Issue for Poolbeg Incinerator.

An opinion on the Poolbeg Incinerator from Bulgaria.  Sure what do they know about hiding corruption says Bertie & Celia. Cheeky ex-commies, after all I did for them and the brickie jobs. 

_________

Copied with minor text edits from Blog Comment Posted to Indymedia.

Bribery and the Incineration Issue for Dublin

by Karel Yurian - Wed May 26, 2010 21:21

source: https://www.indymedia.ie/article/78759?&condense_comments=false#comment269054

Having seen the issues of bribery and embedded corruption seen as normal across many of the countries in the New European Union entrants and also seen the same things practiced elsewhere across the wider World I wonder about the rumours running rife that RPS will be given up to €26 million in extra fees-  above their already over-sized €21 million, going on €32 million fees being paid for by Dublin Corporation.  

 

The European Union has hierto not yet fully deliberated on the vexed procurement issues surrounding how Elsam and another became Dong and Covanta and that during the time of the current discussions (over the last three years) the Dublin Poolbeg Incineration project has leapt from €267 million yo €410 million (according to the American Press.) And that they are now seeking a currency price adjustment to be implemented to the project to guarantee that the Government of Ireland does not default on the tenets of the payment profile - the costs to treat the waste per year!

Surely Ladies and Gentlemen in Ireland you have not missed the issue for even from here in Bulgaria it stares you in the face.

• The Dublin Poolbeg Incinerator Project was tendered for correctly but awarded ILLEGALLY TO AN ORGANISATION THAT WAS NOT PARTY TO THE ORIGINAL BID.
  
  
  
  
• It is ILLEGAL to use the term PUT OR PAY for a Service like this when it is in effect a SUBSIDY.
  
  
  
  
• It is also ILLEGAL for this PUT OR PAY principal then to be used as a means to EXACT FURTHER SUBSIDIES IN LOWER THAN EXPECTED OUTPUTS IN ELECTRICITY AND HEAT which inevitably follows.
  
  
  
• It is ILLEGAL for the CONSULTING ENGINEERS RPS (FORMERLEY MC O'SULLIVANs) to have been awarded a contract to determine the PRE_ORDAINED OUT_COME AND NEED FOR THE DUBLIN INCINERATION PROJECT.
  
  
  
  
• It has always been ILLEGAL PRACTICE UNDER THE Services DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN UNION TO CONTINUE WITH THE APPOINTMENT OF CONSULTING ENGINEERS ON A PROJECT WHEN THEIR FEES HAVE INCREASED (BE IT FROM ADDITIONAL WORK, OR FROM NEW WORKs) WHICH SO MATERIALLY INCREASE THE VALUE (OF THE ORIGINAL SERVICE CONTRACT) BY OVER 30%!
  DUBLIN CORPORATION IS IN ITS OFFICERS CULPABLE OF THIS MISMANAGEMENT AND NOW THE EU NEEDS TO STEP IN AND SERVE NOTICE OF REDRESS.
  
  
  
  
• In these items therefore the EU should also take note that the VARIOUS ACTS OF COERCIAN CURRENTLY BEING ADOPTED BY DUBLIN CORPORATION TO FORCE THE WASTE INDUSTRY TO SUPPLY ITS FREELY COLLECTED AND CONTRACTED WASTE OBLOGATIONS TO THE INCINERATION PLANT (SHOULD IT EVER GET BUILT) IS A MOVE AGAINST THE CONSTITUION OF THE EUROPEAN UNION IDENTIFIER ON TRADE AND IS A RESTICTIVE PRACTICE BANNED IN LAW UNDER BOTH EU AND IRISH STAUTES.
  
  
  
  

In the previous items I have just scanned it seems that the premise for taking the Waste to Ringsend-Poolbeg is flawed under the EIS EIA rules of the EU in that there has been no comparable study done to suggest that the waste could not have been transferred to the existing Land Fill Site by the Ring Road. If that had been done the concerns over the option for shipping waste through the most densely populated area of Dublin would have been eliminated in its entirety.

Likewise and I return to the issue of the day, Incineration does not do what it is supposed to do. Professor Michael H Hayes (at the University of Limerick) and Dr Daniel H Hayes (of the Carbolea Institute at the same University of Limerick) have both shown that the best option Environmentally is the conversion of the Biomass in the Waste to the Biofuel for Transport Ethanol - after separation of the Recyclables and the Inert materials (these last two are also not included within the incineration option.) This position has also been verified by Dr Dominic Hogg of Eunomia and now it seems many others including many in Denmark Sweden Norway and Finland as well as in the UK China Korea Vietnam and India - all of whom are adopting this system.

WHY? Simply put it solves the Environmental issues as well as being as much as 60% cheaper in Capital costs and in operations and maintenance costs.

Again earlier in these items we read that the Waste to Ethanol process can be effected at a treatment cost which can be set lower than Land Fill Costs -- I think I read €30 per tonne was proposed for Dublin. Further I also read that there would be no treatment cost after 6 years from the start. Further it does not need the illegal subsidies of a Put or Pay base structure to survive!

Why then does the Government dilly dally with this? There is no contest.