Waimate

Environment Canterbury and Waimate District Council request more information from SIRRL. ECan stated that the requested information is required to assist in preparing the Key Issues report, which the Council will be required to provide to the EPA under S149G RMA. The 22-page request by ECan included Dr Emily Wilton’s assessment of SIRRL’s air quality emissions report, for which Wilton requested further information from SIRRL. Dr Wilton’s notes highlighted “inconsistencies” between the company’s operational, technical overview and air quality assessment reports in SIRRL’s resource consent application. Read ECan request here “It’s important for the people to have answers” – Paul Taylor, SIRRL. In an April 2023 Stuff article, director Paul Taylor said SIRRL had gone to the “next level” in many of the reports they commissioned, which “were not necessarily required”, but they did it “because we felt it’s important for the people to be able to have answers to those questions.”  As July 2024 rolls around, ‘the people’ still await ‘answers to those questions’, suggesting SIRRL continue to believe information about this proposal is ‘not necessarily required’.

After receiving an extensive recommendation report from the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA), Environment Minister David Parker has referred the Project Kea proposal to the Environment Court. On 31 August 2023, the Minister for the Environment ‘called in’, or issued a direction, to refer the application to the Environment Court. The direction was issued under section 142(2) of the Resource Management Act (RMA).The Minister asked the EPA for advice on whether the application was of national significance and, if so, whether it should be referred to a Board of Inquiry or the Environment Court. EPA’s role in the processing of ‘Project Kea”. The EPA will publicly notify SIRRL’s application so people can make submissions. Then, they will pass on the application and the submissions to the Environment Court, setting the timeframe for the next steps in the process. The EPA is not involved in the decision-making process. The EPA states they are organising public notification of the direction and the applications under section 149C of the RMA. They also state that they will provide further information about public notification and the submission process on their webpage when it becomes available.   Also available on the EPA’s webpage: The Minister for the Environment’s direction to refer the application to the Environment Court (PDF, 398KB) EPA advice about referring the SIRRL application to the Environment Court (PDF, 2.8MB) EPA Website

Waitaki electorate candidates (left to right and top to bottom); Miles Anderson (National), Ethan Reille (Labour), Roger Small (Democracy NZ), Sean Beamish (ACT), Pleasance Hansen (Green), Ray Bailey (NZ Loyal). All the candidates, except Ray Bailey, who was not present, were asked to answer yes or no to whether they supported the Project Kea proposal. Act’s Sean Beamish stated that he hadn’t heard of the proposal and, therefore, could not provide comment. Miles Anderson (National), Ethan Reille (Labour), Roger Small (Democracy NZ) and Pleasance Hansen (Green) all voiced their opposition to the Project Kea proposal, indicating a consensus against it.

REL managing director Paul Taylor tries to secure a heads-of-agreement between Timaru District Council and baling contractor ERP Group to store 50,000 – 70,000 tonnes of waste at Redruth landfill for the proposed W-t-E incinerator in Waimate. The agreement states, “Renew Energy will be independently responsible for supplying 350,000 tonnes of waste per annum to the plant.”  This agreement shows how Renew Energy will be responsible for supplying the waste and their intention to continue to partner with ERP Group, despite the company’s poor waste management practices, which ultimately resulted in ERP Group owner Michael Corcoran, moving to Australia and leaving his landlords with thousands of tonnes of baled waste, destined for the proposed ‘Project Kea’ incinerator in Waimate. The cleanup of the illegally stored waste Corcoran left behind was reported to cost several million dollars. Read the heads of agreement request and response by Timaru District Council below. Heads of Agreement More on ERP Group and their involvement with REL, below. ERP GROUP

“There was an estimated 1,800,965 tonnes of waste in the South Island that went to class 1 and 2 landfills and farm dumps in 2021, much of which could have instead gone to an Energy from Waste plant. Project Kea will look to secure approximately 20% (or 365,000 tonnes) of that volume.” – Paul Taylor, SIRRL. Class 2 landfills are used to dispose of construction and demolition fills, a large quantity of which is rubble, providing no calorific value. Farm dumps are essentially private landfills. For SIRRL to gain access to those volumes, the company would need to collect waste from every farm site on South Island, which is not plausible. Claiming 1.8 million tonnes of available waste material in the South Island could be put through a Waste incinerator is misleading. Also, claiming that you require only 20% of that volume distorts the truth even further. For more on SIRRL’s waste projections see below. More on Waste

“The company has agreements with waste contractors “such as Waste Management, Envirowaste and Ecowaste, but for commercial reasons, we can’t really talk about it.” – Paul Taylor, SIRRL.   However, Waste Management, the country’s largest waste management company, holds contracts for approximately a third of the South Island’s waste. Evan Maehl, its managing director, asserts that the company has no agreements or understanding with SIRRL and would not be a supplier for the proposed waste-to-energy incinerator. Enviro NZ, the country’s second-largest waste management company, formerly known as EnviroWaste, has made its stance clear. It has no agreement or understanding with any proposed waste-to-energy incinerator. Read full North & South article below. N&S Article

In a North & South article titled ‘A Burning Question,’ Reporter George Driver asked SIRRL director Paul Taylor about links between SIRRL and the Chinese government; Taylor said, “They’re a large public company, so I’m not sure whether they’re linked.” China Tianying (CNTY) comprises 41% of South Island Resource Recovery Limited (SIRRL). CNTY also owns EUZY, which owns a further 19% of SIRRL.  This is hard to believe, considering Paul Taylor has been closely involved with CNTY on three previous Waste to Energy proposals. Read full N&S article here Chinese government ownership CECEP Huayu Fund Management Co. Ltd China Asset Management Co. Ltd Combined these two Chinese Government owned companies have a shareholding of over 10% of CNTY. More on CNTY below. CNTY

Environment Canterbury, Waimate District Council and local Runanga request ministerial call-in of Project Kea.Requests were also made by Why Waste Waimate, Zero Waste Network and the Waimate Doctors. In a bizarre turn of events SIRRL also makes a call-in request after contesting councils request.The councils’ request to the Minister was based on the following crucial Resource Management Act criteria: The proposal has aroused widespread public concern or interest regarding itsactual or likely effect on the environment (including the global environment); The proposal involves or is likely to involve a significant use of natural andphysical resources;  The proposal involves or is likely to involve technology, processes or methodsthat are new to New Zealand and that may affect its environment; The proposal is likely to be significant in terms of section 8 of the RMA;  The proposal affects more than one region or district. Read more

Self-proclaimed waste-to-energy expert and SIRRL director Herman Sioen claims Project Kea is “Best of the best.” “It goes one step beyond what would be normal practice in Europe. For every potential risk, there is a double system; if one would fail for some reason, there is always a second system that takes over and ensures the emissions are ok.” When SIRRL returned to Waimate in March 2023, they hosted what they termed “information sharing sessions” to provide more information about the Project Kea incineration plant proposed for Waimate. Mr Sioen repeatedly referred to W-t-E practices in European cities, providing incentives for W-t-E in Europe that don’t exist in little old Waimate. Incentives for building plants in highly populated areas, servicing central heating requirements, proximity to waste sources, and the scarcity of land for landfilling. Mr Sioen said, “If you take a hot shower in Paris, the chances are the rubbish from the day before has provided the hot water.” Comments like these underscore the Significant discrepancy between the European and Waimate contexts. Read more

When SIRRL director Paul Taylor recently described Project Kea as the “Rolls Royce” of W-t-E plants, it resurrected the story of the Geely GE. The Chinese-built GE was widely regarded as a knock-off of the Rolls Royce Phantom, offered for a fraction of the price of the Phantom. Sound familiar?  Was the GE built to the same exacting standard as the Phantom? Did it carry the same level of engineering and componentry? Of course not!   Project Kea’s budget of NZ$350 million is significantly lower than similar-sized W-t-E plants in Europe, which can cost up to three times as much. This stark contrast raises concerns about the potential risks and feasibility of the project. SIRRL consistently assures us that the Waimate plant will not just meet but exceed European standards. The Project Kea website showcases the Amager Bakke Waste to Energy plant, with its rooftop ski slope, in an attempt to show how well W-t-E plants can integrate within the community. However, it’s important to note that the Copenhagen plant, which serves as a benchmark, costs over NZ$1 billion to build. Amager Bakke is not without its failings and highlights how over-capacity-built plants without available waste feedstocks lead to the importation of waste and the burning of recyclable material. It’s a stark reality that New Zealand lacks specific regulations for Waste-to-Energy (W-t-E) plants. The 33-year-old Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) still regulates NZ’s air emission standards, highlighting the urgent need for updated and specific regulations in this sector. The $350 million budget is suggested to be well below what is required to adhere to the standards of European plants. Can we expect that SIRRL will provide more than is legally required in NZ? There is no evidence to suggest that the plant will be required to adhere to any standards that don’t exist in NZ.