A WEEK after the Government released a report on waste management ordering an increase of 22 incinerators in the UK. BARRY ELLAMS spoke to scientists and GPs to find out why incinerators like the proposed Ince Marsh plant are bad for our health.

Incineration is a Government panic measure that could cost lives and ruin the health of those living near it say local scientists and doctors.

The Government last week ordered 22 incinerators to be built across the UK - days after an application for a 100-hectare resource recovery park at Ince Marsh was submitted to Cheshire County Council.

The application submitted by Peel Environmental includes a waste incinerator that would burn 600,000 tonnes of household refuse via a 100m high stack.

Peel development manager Myles Kitcher pointed out it would be 'good for the environment', adding: 'The incinerator will be a renewable energy source which encourages a reduction in greenhouse gases.'

Mr Kitcher said research by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) had concluded there was no link between incineration and health, despite fears emissions could cause cancer.

'The evidence demonstrates there's no unacceptable risk,' he said.

But specialists in health and the environment dismissed the claims and attacked the Govern-ment's campaign to build more incinerators.

Professor John Dearden of Helsby, a professor of medicinal chemistry and specialist in environmental toxicology at John Moores University Liverpool, believes that contrary to Government reports there is 'science' to prove incinerators are dangerous.

He cited a report, entitled The Health Effects of Waste Incinerators , undertaken by The British Society for Ecological Medicine which gives scientific and medical evidence that modern incinerators are a significant health risk to those living in their fall-out zone.

The report concludes:

Large epidemiological studies have shown higher rates of adult and childhood cancers and birth defects around incinerators.

Recent research has shown very fine particulate pollution, which modern incinerators emit in great quantities, is an key contributor to heart disease, lung cancer and other diseases.

Other pollutants emitted by incinerators include heavy metals (eg mercury) and a wide range of organic chemicals, including known carcinogens, hormone disrupters and substances that damage the immune system and decrease intelligence.

The greatest health concern is the long-term effects such as cancer, birth defects and permanent cognitive damage caused by incinerator emissions to unborn babies and very young children.

Waste incineration is prohibitively expensive when health costs are taken into consideration. European Commission figures indicate a single incinerator could cost the taxpayer up to £50m a year.

Prof Dearden, campaigning against the Ince Marsh plan, explained: 'The Government has taken a blinkered stance on waste management. In a modern world running very short of basic commodities incineration is not the answer.

'On the one hand the Government are pushing incineration as a short-term solution to cope with the closure of landfill sites across the UK - approximately three per month - but are also pushing recycling as a long-term answer to household waste.

'I'm all in favour of recycling - Vale Royal Borough Council increased the recycling rate from 8% to 48% in a year.

'If you build an incinerator it has a huge outlay. The Ince Marsh Incinerator will cost between £200m-£250m and has a lifetime of 30 years burning 600,000 tonnes of waste to justify its cost.

'What if recycling rates continue to soar in neighbouring counties as in Vale Royal - will they import waste from further afield or even abroad?

'I attended a recent presentation where Lancashire County Council agreed not to burn 1.25m tonnes of waste that they produce per year.'

Dr Elizabeth Agnew and husband Dr Andy Barendt, of Elton, say that in light of the health concerns expressed by eminent scientists and doctors all incinerators should be scrapped.

Dr Agnew explained: 'I am in total agreement with the report. This is an area with a high incident rate of cancer and respiratory diseases.'

'If this were to go ahead I would worry for the people who already have respiratory illness.

'I would worry for pregnant women and young children playing in schoolyards just over a mile from this.'

'What is the point also of me going to work, preventing people from smoking, encouraging people to diet and live a healthy life when this incinerator will bring pollution.

'We shouldn't have to prove to the Government this is harmful. They should prove to us it's safe.'