PLANS FOR TOXIC WASTE INCINERATOR CAUSES CONCERN
PLANS for a toxic waste incinerator that could affect the health and lives of people around the
county is sending shock waves through the population of Newton Aycliffe and surrounding villages.
A planning application by Fornax (North-East) Ltd was rejected by Durham County Council but an
appeal was upheld and approved by Government Planning Inspectors, with Inspector John Woolcock
saying that many of the concerns from the general public were ‘not well-founded’ and that the
incinerator would not damage human health.
The general public begs to differ with a strenuous campaign underway by objectors who fear for
the future health of their children.
The original reason for the local authority to decline the application was nothing to do with human
health, say objectors – it was to do with the amount of people employed required in an Industrial
estate meant for manufacture. That is not enough persons per square metre of space for the size of
this facility.
Steve Williams, whose wife, Viv is originally from St John’s Chapel and is also an objector, said,
“the people like us who objected to the original application did so on human health grounds! Fornax
originally only talked about clinical waste to be processed in this plant. The hazardous waste
disclosure was only revealed at the very last minute – which begs the question, what else might
come to light?”
Objectors are concerned about the air pollution caused by this operation could increase the
likelihood of childhood cancers along with other adverse medical difficulties.
Steve concurs, saying, “The planning inspectorate, which allowed the appeal, noted that the stack
height was at the absolute minimum for a plant of this type and all research we have found says that
the higher the stack, the less pollution hits the ground.”
The proposed waste incinerator is vehemently opposed by people living near it but also by others
in a wider area who are worried that the fall-out from toxic waste will affect their lives. Campaigners
have called for an independent health and environmental review of the site before it can operate
and indeed the Environment Agency is preparing a case against the facility. It has launched a
consultation into an environmental permit application from Fornax (North East) Ltd to operate an
energy-from-waste plant.
The EA’s website explains that the company wants to operate a high-temperature thermal-
treatment facility near Newton Aycliffe, in County Durham. Under the permit Fornax has applied for,
the site would be able to accept hazardous waste and clinical waste for incineration and the EA is
now seeking views from the local community and interested groups on the application.
This consultation is now live and will run until June 27 th and can be found at DL5 6UG, Fornax
(North East) Limited, EPR/QP3720LP/A001: environmental permit consultation – Environment
Agency – Citizen Space
Campaigners against the incinerator have spent a lot of time researching similar facilities around
the country and found that waste Incinerators are usually granted planning permission in poorer
areas of the country. The Aycliffe application is situated on the Merchant Park estate, just off
Heighington Lane with schools, care homes, and playgrounds, with the UTC South Durham and Little
Clubs Nursery nearby.
Objectors have found that recent independent studies conducted by the ToxicoWatch
Foundation, with support from Zero Waste Europe, have uncovered alarming levels of toxic
pollutants—including dioxins, PFAS, and heavy metals—in the environments surrounding Waste-to-
Energy (WtE) incinerators in Spain, France, and The Netherlands. The research focused on facilities in
Zubieta (Spain), Paris (France), and Harlingen (Netherlands), revealing widespread contamination of
soil, water, vegetation, and food sources such as backyard eggs.
The list of waste chemicals that can be burned if the Aycliffe incinerator plans are given the go-
ahead by the EA is frightening. They feature a cocktail of dangerous substances, including metallic
oxides containing heavy metals, arsenic, mercury, cyanide and scores of others that can be
hazardous to health. The findings of research by Zero Waste Europe indicate a systemic failure of
environmental oversight, with communities exposed to hazardous chemicals at levels far beyond
legal safety limits.
Viv Williams commented, “These statistics to me proves we absolutely must find a better way to
manage waste. Sweden can do it, why can’t we?
“It appears as though the love of money comes before the health of the nation because the
disposing of hazardous waste is big money business.”
The fall-out from the burning of this hazardous waste could spread for miles, which is a concern
for people from a much wider area – at least a 12-miles radius. The incinerator, if eventually
approved, would be burning this waste 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The Environment Agency
would only issue the permit if it’s satisfied the operator could comply with the permit conditions and
has appropriate systems in place to operate the incinerator with a high level of protection of the
environment and human health.
An alternative way to contact the EA with your objections is to email
