RDF waste treatment gives island all options for export

SHIPPING Guernsey’s waste to Europe means it has to be treated to a higher level than if it was being sent to Jersey, but those behind the plan insist the extra costs are ‘not significant’.

Waste Management Facility
Computer generated images of the proposed waste transfer station at Longue Hougue

The States meets tomorrow with members being asked to give the final sign-off to the waste strategy bill, which has risen significantly since the issue was last debated in 2014.

Under the proposals, before it is exported, rubbish will be converted into refuse-derived fuel before being sent to the UK and then on to Sweden.

Jersey has been ruled out for now, with the lack of contingency should something go wrong with its incinerator a key factor.

Total costs over 20 years of the waste strategy are expected to be around £298.5m., of which capital costs are £32.2m.

The transfer station will cost an estimated £13.1m., up by £5.3m. on what was expected.

RDF production and export are the dominant component of the operating costs, coming in at £89.3m. over 20 years, an increase of £32.5m. on the 2014 prediction.

States’ Trading Supervisory Board president Charles Parkinson said that whatever the final destination, Guernsey needed a transfer station to receive and process waste prior to export.

Comments for: "RDF waste treatment gives island all options for export"


If the estimations have gone up over such a short period of time, just imagine what it will be like in 10 or 20 years time.

Banned again!

Those responsible will be far away from this island in 10/20 years time markB. This broken & bankrupt island will still be paying their pensions though!!


This for me is about trust. Do I trust those insisting that this is the only viable option and that it is the absolutely cheapest it can be..........that'll be a resounding no. Do I further trust the figures being used........er that'll be another no. Barry "the cost will be what they will be" Brehaut pushing one of his hand picked committee members to be the public face further should worry us as he is not one to shy away from the limelight if something is going well. Rather like putting the hapless Sarah Rouxel out as the face of the other bad news ( this week I hasten to add, seems to be a lot of those from E&I) at the L'Ancresse sea wall he obviously is already looking at the next election.

His and YB's photo with other like minded individuals on their twitter feed deserves a caption competition, any offers?

Trevor Hockey


Agree, SHR was appalling on the TV the other night and many people say she is a disgrace to her parish for wanting the sea to reclaim part of the common.

Fortune Teller

I think Jersey will be taken aback by the contingency claim over its incinerator, which is complete rubbish!!!

For a start, Jersey has two incinerators housed in one Energy from Waste plant. Thanks to the recent global economic slow down, their EfW plant is operating at around 75% capacity, so it could easily handle extra waste from Guernsey. There are no serious restrictions on shipping waste between the Islands as Guernsey and Jersey are not separate nations and Jersey is very unlikely to insist on returning the residual ash.

The fact is that Guernsey States caved in to the loud protests of recycling enthusiasts without assessing the long term costs, which have proved to be considerable. Already the export solution has run into currency exchange issues and exporting waste simply leaves Guernsey exposed to outside influences.

The problem is that Guernsey has messed up badly, but no key player wants to admit it. Thus the public will, both metaphorically and literally, pay the price -and it will be considerably more than it is already.

Bloke A

Yes that's right - one building housing two separate incinerator lines. Neither of which alone has capacity to deal with all of Jersey's waste, so not really much of a contingency. Unless of course they propose Guernsey will be front of the queue if they have any technical issues.

So 75% capacity means they could "easily handle our waste". Presumably if ours is less than 25% of their capacity. Oh, hang on.....

And it is 75% due to global economic slow down. What happens if their economy picks up? Or if their population keeps growing. Oh, hang on.....

You may also find that technically (and actually), we are separate. They have different laws to us, although I have to admit the people look a bit similar to us.

As for not insisting on taking ash back - well I suppose that depends on whether they are the only game in town. And what they are doing with theirs - can't see they'd particularly want ours lying around over there.

And let's just suppose our States had other options but decided to go with Jersey because, let's face it we are friends really. Everyone would be happy then. Provided of course they didn't want to charge more than anyone else.

Oh, hang on......


I hope the transfer station will be 200 foot high and have a 500 foot deep basement, then the waste can stay in situ.


If we are producing fuel then should this not generate an income of some sort?

What local expertise is there to run such a plant?



This might be a very naive question but maybe someone could explain...

Most of the good consumed in Guernsey are brought to the islands (on ships/planes). I'd assume the "mass" of waste is slightly less than the goods brought in (digestion being one reason?).

Why can't the wast travel back the way it came and then be integrated in the existing waste-processing (Portsmouth seems to have a big waste processing site)?

Major Denis Bloodnok

The fundamental problem with all of this is Guernsey is an island. Whether you export waste as waste or sort it into recyclable waste and just waste unless you deal with it here either by throwing it in a hole in the ground or burning it there will be substantial costs in sending it off island in a big boaty woaty even as far as Jersey let alone half way round Europe.

I have yet to hear that we are actually going to recycle anything here on island. As far as I am aware there will be no plant pulping waste paper and making toilet rolls. There are no plans to reuse the glass on island that is so painstakingly and expensively collected.

Anything you send off island will cost the island as freight costs are extortionate or so we are led to believe by local shop keepers.

Perhaps we can get Amazon interested in setting up a distribution centre here. After all plenty of their packages end up here. You just have to find a market for 'a little bit of paradise delivered to your door'. 'See how the tax exiles live' - get yourself a big box of Guernsey rubbish delivered to your door. Even Guernsey Post would benefit.

Lets get serious that's no more a runner than spending £300million on this over the next twenty years. OK thanks to the useless Bond we could but let's just not maybe. Let Guernsey common sense prevail for just one more time.


I would like to see kerb recycling stopped as it's too expensive. Island needs a lot more recycling areas at various locations.

Nobody in my road puts out bags as they still go to the various points with all the bottles etc.

Big decisions coming up which will be paid for by us.

The states waste so much money and today we have the milk fiasco.

We have lost, given away ,been coned out of so much money the list is getting very long.

Trevor Hockey


Agree 100%, always see the bring banks busy and the ones at the Vale Douzaine were very popular as they were sheltered and on a decent surface which didn't wreck your car.

We need more accountability. - A la Lanterne..!

Donkey Boiler

What happens to the glass we take to the bring banks? I believe a certain amount is used in the mix to make concrete blocks, but doesn't the rest just go into landfill at the reclaimation at Longue Hougue?

Major Denis Bloodnok

I would imagine it gets shipped off island to be recycled. Some is then used in road surfaces when it's been ground up. There's a nice glittery patch just outside the Picquet House in town - looks lovely on a sunny day. Not sure which colour it is but one colour glass cannot be used at all but the government considered it better not to go large on this as people would be discouraged from recycling the other colours. My cousin in the UK was dutifully trudging every type and colour of glass to recycling banks not realising that a proportion of the effort was a complete waste of time.


I thought everything to do with recycling has been sold to a private enterprise, Mayside and Pointes Lane among others. Anyway, here is a link on how to properly manage rubbish and also make heaps of money from it. When the video was made, they didn't have the facilities to sort rubbish, that has since been added. I have been taken around the site and it is very impressive. It just shows how backwards thinking the States Of Guernsey is.



Exactly the GRG group have been exporting RDF very successfully for some time, theyvwould be the ideal (local too) company to run whatever scheme is chosen!


Good morning Trever

"Agree, SHR was appalling on the TV the other night and many people say she is a disgrace to her parish for wanting the sea to reclaim part of the common."

This is outrageous ! "She" actually said that she wants the sea to reclaim the common and you heard her say I it ??

Where did she say this Trev and when - apart from in your head of course.

We need more accountability. - A la Lanterne..!

Trevor Hockey


From your posts I suspect that you live in the GY6 Vale, so may not have the interests of GY3 at heart.

It matters not a jot the exact words that this silly woman uttered, it is the fact that Environment want to let the anti tank wall, which has also doubled up as a sea wall for decades fall to pieces, managed decline is the words used. Just like the managed decline that the Board of Administration did to our markets I guess.

My interpretation of this, echoed by former Deputy Graham Guille and many customers is that Envo want to let the common take it's chances against the sea.

Island Wide Voting


Yes.The young lady DID say words on TV to the effect that it would be cheaper and therefore better to let the wall fall into 'managed decline' so that it will eventually look like the beach at Port Soif with a sand dune effect

I can't remember if she was asked, or declined to answer,what effect such 'managed decline' would have on the nearby tearoom and toilet block,or the newly surfaced road to the Eastern car park,and I don't know if she was actually talking in a personal capacity or just spouting the mantra espoused in the Envo Committee Room

She did however partially answer a question about what has happened to the £5,000,000 handed to the Committee for sea defence repairs (before her time) and she replied to the effect that consultation fees would have swallowed up much of that figure

I fully understand that the young lady was probably put in front of the cameras because her President would have been very busy preparing for the big waste debate

Donkey Boiler

That £50 million would go a long way to halt the chronic erosion between Fort Le Plomb and Fort Doyle. A little work done some years ago would have halted what is now a very serious situation, and will cost more and more to fix the longer it is neglected. I suppose most members of the house are totally unaware of the metres that have been lost to the sea in the last decades, and now that more soft material has been exposed is accelerating at an alarming rate. How about a site visit in a minibus like they used to do for the old IDC?

Donkey Boiler

£5 million.


The cash strapped Envo do not have money for the anti tank or Fermain walls, as they need it for funding 3.6 million for empty buses and gross incompetent overspending at La Salerie.

As for SHR, I agree with you Trev as Prospero seems like more of a quisling type apologist.

He must be son of baz.


Interesting debate on social media following national news coverage about only locally born, British or ( currently) EU nationals being allowed to stand for election. There seems to be some uncertainty to what the position is locally does anyone know?

Island Wide Voting

Must be OK Paul

Lilita Kruze,Latvia's first Honorary Consul in Guernsey,stood in St PP North last April and got 560 votes


As Jersey are debating the subject at the moment and with Brexit putting a cloud over, presumably, EU citizens ability to purchase property here I wouldn't neccesarily assume Guernsey has legislation either way. For example if you are from a country outside of the EU are you legible based on your marital status only? What happens if that status changes? Be interesting if there is a legal requirement either way.

Island Wide Voting

Come to think of it I'm now left wondering if Baz might be Danish or Swedish as he looks a bit like a Norse


Good morning Trev

GY3 Actually - can see you from my shed.

It does actually matter to us non-bigots "..the exact words this...woman uttered...."

You seem to have mis-represented what the deputy said - if she said anything at all - just imagine that you had got in and made a statement and then some Trev went on to deliberately mis-quote you. What would you have thought / done / felt ?

Do you honestly feel / think that elected politicians would put property - including protected ancient monuments, lives and golfers at risk ? ok- I'll give you golfers.

Why for goodness sake ? What exactly would be the point of this wilful gambling of people and property ?

And Deputy Guille actually "echoes" your interpretations does he - well, so you do influence the Assembly - Nice.

And for goodness sake use a hanky !

Island Wide Voting


Clearly you did not see the TV interview and are therefore sounding off from a position of knowing sod all

Best let it go my friend


Afternoon IWV

I did not but both you and I know that Trev was implying far more than that.

Managed decline is a managed decline - the clue is in the wording.

And I ask you - do you think that elected officials would put persons or property at risk ?

Shocking about the consultancy fees if true - I suspect it is - but that is another issue.

Will IWV sort out outrageous mis-use of funds ?

Island Wide Voting

Yes if the electorate show sufficient interest to avoid putting their crosses against the outrageous mis-users of funds


Good morning IWV

In that case the electorate would have to have the gift of being able to look into the future in order to ascertain who would be likely to do such a thing.

I also respond to you post re PP's on another thread