Closing Speech
As President of GEPEC-Ecologists of Catalonia, organizer of these meetings, together with the Platform in Defence of the Ebro and the Association of Environmentalists of Catalonia, tell me that I have to make a closing speech. But I tell you that the closing have already done all you have done with all the conclusions of these round tables, working groups and discussions that have taken place this weekend, a speech which has served to highlight what has long been suspected in the Catalan Countries:
1 - First, the attacks on the territory and the environment have no political color or country, or cardinal points. Like wildfire spread over time and space are common and inexhaustible source of conflict. They show a serious discrepancy between civil society and political power. They show the chronic lack of dialogue, consultation and participation between the dominant power and institutions committed to the conservation area. They show the volubility, the unbearable lightness of being political, their language, double or triple (depending on the time election, according to occupational position, according to the county, according to the forum ...). All in all, a brilliant exercise in what politicians call it pragmatism, ecologists called adaptation to the environment and 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 for our politicians who have proved incapable of defending the rights of primogeniture and the country have accepted too often the dish of lentils in exchange for vague rules, 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 of renovation policy there has been no renewal ideological background to ensure that the premises of environmental sustainability, ecological balance and the precautionary principle transcend technocracy and administrative facing the country's development criteria of wellbeing than those of pure and growth of economic activity and gross domestic product. Discussions such as those that occurred on transgenic plants and power lines in rural areas, waste management, pollution control, etc. ... demonstrating that we are far from a society governed by criteria of good ecological practices. Yet never until now has not been used in Catalonia as a picturesque ecological lexicon. Our jargon has become the official language of some Government departments. But this environmentally correct language, linked to those of some environmentalists autoqualicatius pompous members of the government, has only vulgarized 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 representative of the country. The ultimate Christian "who are not with me are against me" Catalonia is still valid in spite of the hopes for change. The tendentiousness and discretion that had marked the strategy CIU for 20 years in relations with civil society has continued.
Have served as the working system that Susan George as advocated in the Lugano REPORT: "Allow NGOs have consultative status in formal bodies to 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 associations and groups related to the objectives of the government and the marginalization of those groups likely to cause social conflict and support when making development policies clash of with full preservation of the land (a very special record that this marginalization and to empty Government Delegate to the Tarragona region, Mr Xavier Sabaté). Also remained the popular practice of wanting to buy our souls based projects ghosts utopian conventions and commissions that have only been tracking ethereal smoke and smoke! Simply because they have not seen the GEPEC or the Ecologists of Catalonia or the platforms they can cover the Southern mouth in exchange for money.
Specific examples of this practice bad policy could be found throughout the territory but we specified in the scope of GEPEC-Ecologists of Catalonia (Terres de l'Ebre Tarragona)
1 - We have seen political Left in procession to Flix ERCROSS saying that the company could not be responsible for a discharge that occurred during decades due to lack of legislation (with 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 in 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 the won to its shareholders the stock market only so far in 2005 102%. They know what this means, right? That a shareholder ERCROS in January was 20 million now has more than 40, but the river Ebro probably have to pay between, we, of course.
3 - We hear prominent politicians touted the need for water conservation, new water culture, drought ... and forgetting that these same politicians and their parties have been for years-and continue-the Tarragona Provincial allowing you to have a shameful promotion of free Golf Courses! The Council has done this for years: some golf courses that have proven meridianament but they 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 (not water purifier!).
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 installations put into question from the opposition easy: landfills (such as Tivissa or the Village), gasifiers (Mora), metanitzadores (A Botarell and Tarragona), incineration in cement (Alcanar, etc.). All simply the lack of political courage to stretch your ears and punish a good bunch of incompetent mayors (most of his own party) that does not have the means necessary to reduce and recycle waste generated by its citizens.
5 - Finally (why go?) We saw tons and tons of energetic inconsistency in the Tarragona region (not go to Bescanó). Thus, we have seen striking stupefied as the presence of our three nuclear power stations, two stations were added in Tarragona, has approved the construction of another thermal Vandellòs, being asked to do another thermal Riba-roja ... and not to mention hundreds of projects for wind farms around our coasts, 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 meant, does not entail a right to renew the relationship between the environment and human beings, we have no choice but to conclude that through these days we see the need to build a PPCC network of environmental protection in the region 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.
It touches us no choice but to assume that social pressure, the public report, the cry! ... is the only language that politicians are willing to listen. But we must press, reporting, called ... ARGUMENTS in!! With serious arguments, the weight of scientific reports, with the knowledge and proper use of laws and administrative procedures, technical data, with strict ecological studies ... Because although we hear the cry is for politicians, because we listen ARGUMENTS serve society and we respect the country.
Tortosa, 28 May 2005 Damian Barceló Vernet and GEPEC-President of EDC
27 May 2005. Press Release
Currently, and for months in the heat of "chips" of Torelló it is burning a lot of quantity and variety of materials, as everyone can see who brings it. The wood is added all kinds of plastics, PBC, polystyrene, plywood, plastic, melamine, fiberglass, varnish, textile fibers, etc.. the combustion of which is highly polluting.
For months, the Department of Environment is advised, with a rich graphical report made dated 10 December 2004 that the platform was reached, dated December 16 and shortly 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 to bring the company CESPA, the leading group of companies that are CERRO SL., Manager and promoter of the heat project to which the platform opposes.
Since then nothing has changed. Every day the fuel that reaches the temperature has remained the same, and so to the present.
The monitoring committee of the current thermal Torelló not met since December 2002, despite repeated demands by the representative of the Platform Antiincineradora this committee.
Given all this, on 27 April 2005 he proceeded al'aixecament an affidavit that contains some of the materials used in the heat now.
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 Minister of Environment and Housing, Mr Milan Salvador, the Minister of Health, Marina Geli, and to date, also the prosecutor of the Environment to consider whether there are intervening.
We question, once again, the credibility that we can earn the group of companies that currently manage the heat and seeking to build and manage a facility ten times greater next to this.
ANTIINCINERADORA PLATFORM OF THE VALLEY OF GES
Congratulations!
The company Global 3 Peaks, SLU has given up the construction of a thermal power plant of combined cycle gas in the municipalities of populations and Baths Mariola Beneixama. In a letter to the Department of Environmental Quality and Evaluation at the Ministry of Environment, responsible for the company justified its decision "against the opposition that the councils involved have said the project" and the position against many organizations in the area.
The resignation of the promoters in the project has been the effect of convincing demonstrations of the councils of Alcoyano, Alt Vinalopó and Vall d'Albaida, civil society organized a Coordinating anticentral made by individuals, groups, institutions, associations, foundations, schools, parties, unions, gangs, etc.., and the pressure on the Council of Alicante in the Valencian Parliament and Congress of different political parties.
In recent months, from the website of the Coordinating notermica.org Against Power Plant Swim Beneixama has repeatedly encouraged the citizens to fight the proposed power plant because, according to coordinator, it was "possible influence final decision of the promoters by public pressure. "
From
What is happening with the thermal? THE CONTINUING THREAT
On March 16 City Hall Torelló disseminated drum and cymbals, the company CERRO SL. has requested termination of the contract.
On March 21 Platform Antiincineradora the valley of Ges requested confirmation of this news at the Department of Environment and Housing, the municipality of Sant Pere de Torello ial firm Hill. SL.
The council says that the company requested retire, but said if the council has accepted this resignation.
CERRO SL. 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), which is who should solve the environmental permit for the project presented CERRO SL., We have not responded so far, but the Minister Salvador Milan explains is that negotiations between CERRO SL. and the Department continue and that their intention is to authorize plant biomass of 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 Torelló. That is, a plant as have expressed the councils of the valley of Ges, the Osona District Council Agenda XXI Strategic Plan of the valley of Ges, and Orís Bisaura.
Given the lack of information that is released by the Environment Ministry and the statements of a central that provides electricity, hot water and heating in the valley of Ges, we fear that you want to end up making it a Torelló 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 ACTUAL THERMAL CREAM ST
Currently, the thermal Torelló, as shown in the photos accompanying this text and as everyone can see who brings it directly, is burning a lot of variety and quantity of waste.
The wood is added all kinds of plastics, pbcs, polystyrene, laminated chipboard, melamine, fiberglass, vernissats, textile fibers, etc.. the combustion of which is highly polluting.
We wonder how this company that is proposing a large installation in Torelló, it will ensure respect for and strict compliance with the fuel specified on the license activity, but is able to meet him now in a much smaller plant?
What credibility deserves this group of companies? We can leave in their 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. So far, it has no control or inspection. A malpractice that threatens the health of the inhabitants of the valley. What credibility can have in the future to control a company multiplied by ten the size of the current heat.
WHY A WINDMILL, AND HOLY YES
It means the efforts of the Department of Environment and Housing to promote a large installation Torelló when a simple refurbishment of the existing thermal and burning too few tons of forest biomass to solve the heating of the 450 users and people would be profitable.
The example is in Molins de Rei, with a temperature that is presented as a sustainable model for the same administration. This gives hot water and heating to 680 homes and only uses 2200 tons. per year of forest and agricultural biomass only (almond shells, hazelnuts, 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 guise of a macroplanta biomass burning ends, as such, any kind of waste, some highly polluting due to the limited availability of forest biomass.
Why not the Department is committed to the path of Molins de Rei to Torelló? 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 business that drive the creation of a large plant with various excuses (recovery, Kyoto ,..)?
On the energy recovery incinerator plant?
Recently, the Environment Minister, Salvador Milan, said in
In a temperature inversion with persistent fog and hinder the dispersion of gas near a PEIN (Bellmunt), recommended for technicians to implement it facilities with emissions, we wonder how the Council can think it is the ideal location for a plant to export electricity and allow it contaminated biomass such a diverse and endanger health.
"Promote energy" the contaminated waste is not acceptable .. It can enhance the sun, wind or geothermal, but we can not enhance the industrial waste that can not be "recovered" health of people.
This project does not respond to any national energy map, with arguments that respond to technical factors, climatic, environmental and social as it currently does not exist.
It means the efforts of the Department to promote a large plant in San Pedro when a simple refurbishment of the existing thermal and few tons of biomass burning forest to solve the heating of the 450 users people.
The example is in Molins de Rei, with a thermal model is presented as by the same administration. This gives hot water and heating to 680 homes and uses only 2200 tons per year of exclusively agricultural and forest biomass (almond shells, hazelnuts, olive ...) and natural gas consumption peaks.
Why not the Department is committed to this route to San
It is not that other interests-economic- in this business that drive the creation of a large plant with various excuses (recovery, Kyoto ,..)?
We hope - the hope is the last thing that is lost, sanity finally prevails.
PRESS RELEASE HUB ANTIINCINERADORA March 29, 2005
In front of City Hall press Torelló in announcing that CERRO SL terminate the contract by not asking to go ahead with the project submitted to environmental assessment in 2002 and proposed to authorize the Government but with some modifications by for the fuel, the Platform of the Vall del Antiincineradora Ges want to include:
1. The Platform will ask both the Department of Environment, as the group of companies CERRO Inc., as the council of Sant Pere de Torello, more specific, he considers that the information given is insufficient and leaves many questions and to lighten dark spots.
2. Needless to say this news, if confirmed, would give a significant shift to the conflict that lasts for four years. We would be faced with a unique opportunity to redirect it and reach a solution that would inexcusably to provide a service in St. Peter heating collective dimensions for this unique and need to utilize forest biomass as fuel only.
3. To initiate this process, the Platform calls on governments and companies involved to the maximum transparency and dialogue so that the final solution can be assumed by the company in the valley.
4 .- More than ever, the platform shall be mobilized to common sense and responsibility in decision-imposed and not to watch again to make unilateral decisions that divide people and threaten public health and environment of the valley of Ges.
PRESS RELEASE OF PCRR March 31, 2005
At the meeting held yesterday between the Minister of Environment, the Secretary General of the Department. Medi
The first intervention was an explanation by the PCRR approaches 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 expansion of results recovery of waste, separate 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 and cement plants or plants. Also he was getting valuation and PCRR amendments to draft bills regulating waste and the canon (see the attached press release).
The bodies of PCRR also stressed that the current administration used the same address as that of previous administrations when they wanted to discredit and disparage organizations and people / positions to be developed or opposition to projects in the pipeline.
In the second round by buig inertitzat restauracdsffsdfdffreres ... as a substitute for traditional landfills. As for the conflicts referred to condf
The perception of groups at the start of the meeting was disappointment and concern at the fact that the current administration is not sufficiently sensitive to the demands of citizens or daring enough to carry out preventive and lines truly sustainable management of
Amendments al'avantprojecte amending the law in waste 6 / 1993 and the draft Law on financing of waste treatment infrastructure and the tax on waste disposal
The entities of the Federation of Ecologists of Catalonia (Ecologists in Catalonia), we think that the review of the legal framework on waste in Catalonia includes certain criteria for elk management and sustainable prevention of waste we miss, as it does clear that waste management in our country has entered a clear stagnation point and make a step backwards.
SUMMARY OF AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED TO DMAH (Department of Environment and Habitage)
. 1. Changing the law takes to score goals to reduce, reuse and economic and fiscal measures to encourage waste minimization and clean production. We therefore propose that the Government develop over a period of one year a Catalan Waste Reduction Act.
2. Although the law itself 11/2000 regulating incineration that were marked to harmonize the two laws are not taken into account. We propose to collect all the articles of the Law 11/2000 regulating incineration.
3. You must always apply the principles of Community law of proximity and adequacy of facilities for waste treatment and recovery, which is why we propose the removal 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, specific goals and means 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 compulsory purchase. 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 subject to material recovery to all municipalities and that includes a scheduling of these obligations.
7. Be incorporated into the waste service compulsory for all municipalities.
8. Tables should be created wide regional representation office in the territory:
9. The Government should develop a comprehensive program for coordination of all actions necessary, in consultation with and agreement of all stakeholders in each area (vegueria zoning or land).
10. Extending the functions of the ARC to support municipalities to implement the Act.
Proposal for amendments to Act al'avantprojecte measures of financing treatment infrastructure will reside
1. Should funding not only new infrastructure but also the improvement of existing
2. Should ensure that they cover the additional costs of different types of waste management. There are models for collection and management are not covered all the additional costs, in the case of the model and the least residue system for collecting 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 of 24 April (Act Packaging and Packaging Waste).
3. We must ensure that efforts in higher recovery of municipal waste are rewarded. The proposal to amend the law does not establish specific criteria to follow in order to distribute resources. Since the federation is required to establish the criteria to follow is to lower generation and higher recovery of waste materials, excluding energy recovery (incineration) of the concept of recovery. Here we should add that not be returned to municipalities + 25% and unfit to be redistributed best return + to improve separate collection at source and - the improper
4. From Catalonia to Ecologists suggest that states that 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 the way 15 euros per tonne [2] .
5. Consider, also, that affirmative action for incineration is unacceptable given the health and environmental impacts that have, suggest that the amount is equal to the landfill (10 € / tonne)
6. With regard to construction waste down the tax rate of 3 per tonne of waste going to the store. We believe that the amount is adequate but, as in the case of municipal waste, which should be increased gradually, we propose an annual increase of 1 € to achieve the objectives of PROGROC. Subsequently updated at least according to the CPI Catalan.
From the Federation of Ecologists understand that Catalonia should not be used in any way funds from deposits and improvements in existing incinerators, as this concept has been considered in the outsourcing of the final costs of the systems and the must assume the users of these facilities. We also went against the spirit of this Act is to encourage the recovery of form and of all fractions of waste treatment systems and penalize the final.
LETTER FROM THE GROUP'S DEFENSE MINISTER OF THE ENVIRONMENT IN TER
El GDT contesta unes declaracions del conseller de Medi Ambient sobre la tèrmica de Sant Pere
Autor: Grup de Defensa del Ter (GDT) - Data: 2/3/2005
Manlleu, a 29 de febrer de 2005
Mr. Conseller:
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 al'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.
La nostra comunitat s'ha pronunciat abastament i clara per una planta destinada i dimensionada “únicament” a resoldre la calefacció i aigua calenta de Sant Pere de Torelló i amb un combustible del tipus “biomassa EXCLUSIVAMENT FORESTAL” Així s'han pronunciat el Consell Comarcal d'Osona, els ajuntaments de la Vall del Ges, excepte Sant Pere de Torelló que és el promotor del projecte., l'Agenda XXI del Pla Estratègic de la Vall del Ges, Orís i Bisaura que agrupa els 9 municipis propers, altres ajuntaments de la comarca d'Osona i nombrosos alcaldes i regidors, de diferents signes polítics., I una llarga llista d'entitats ecologistes del país, nombroses signatures individuals id'entitats cíviques, al·legacions al projecte, manifestos i un seguit de mobilitzacions ho de mostren.
En aquests moments i des de fa massa temps el departament de Medi Ambient i Habitatge té a les mans l'autorització ambiental d'aquest projecte descomunal. El Departament insinua que hi haurà un projecte nou. Parla d'una tèrmica de biomassa. Qui la construirà aquesta planta, el Departament? A més, la biomassa que proposa té una caracterització prou vaga com per ser també potencialment perillosa. Tampoc posa límits a les dimensions del projecte. Per altra banda, sabem que l'empresa vol tirar endavant el projecte inicial, com sigui i que Medi ambient no es decideix a denegar-lo clarament. I ens preguntem: Què pesarà més finalment, el clam unànime de la població afectada i de les seves entitats i institucions democràtiques, o els interessos econòmics del grup d'empreses id'un únic ajuntament que veu en aquest “negoci” la taula de salvació dels seus deutes ?
Si la incineradora es posa en funcionament no només hi perdrà la salut dels habitants d'Osona i voltants, sinó que s'haurà fet un pas enrera en la política de la gestió dels residus que ha d'encaminar-se decididament cap a una real disminució, reutilització i reciclatge d'aquests.
I també se'n ressentirà la credibilitat d'alguns polítics davant del poble d'Osona., que pensarà que conceptes com l'ecologia poden ser només un vernís decorador d'una manca real d'ideologia en mans de segons qui.
Moisès Company i Caballeria (segueixen 185 signatures més)
PLANTES DE PURINS I RESIDUS CARNIS
segons publica el Segre ahir i avui, (8 i 9 de desembre de 2004)el Govern vol que les noves plantes de tractament de purins cremin també cadàvers animals i residus d'escorxador que no siguin MER.
Imagineu per un moment ue això volés dir que Grefacsa-Sereca Bio perdés el monopoli del tema: a Grefacsa dixaria de venir pat de la immundícia que hi ve a hores d'ara.
Peró fixeu-vos bé: EL MATEIX gOVERN ACABA D'APROVAR UNA AMPLIACIÓ DE GREFACSA.
La plataforma sempre ha dit que el tipus de maquinària d'incineració que està incorporant Grefacsa des del 2001 no es correspon a una hidrolització de cadàvers, sino que és maquinària d'incineració de residus.
Fixeu-vos bé: a l'hora que volen que els cadàvers vagin a altres llocs, permeten que Grefacsa amplïi. Why? doncs per què Grefacsa ja no és una planta de fabricació de pinsos animals com consta la seva llicència d'activitats, sinó que s'ha convertit en una planta d'incineració de residus perillosos.
(tret de www.incineradora.tk , web dde la Plataforma Antiincineradora de Grefacsa a Térmens, web molt recomenable)
MANIFEST DE PROFESSIONALS DE LA MEDICINA SOBRE LA INCINERACIÓ DE GREIXOS ANIMALS
INCINERACION DE RESIDUOS PELIGROSOS? MAS VALE PREVENIR…
“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 )