New technology to eliminate waste station's stink

New technology to eliminate waste station's stink

New technology to eliminate waste station's stink

First published in News by

New technology is being installed to zap away a lingering stink at a waste station.

The waste odour management system will be introduced at The Waste Transfer Station in Hollingdean, Brighton, following complaints from nearby residents.

People living within the Round Hill community in Hollingdean have raised concerns about the smell – as well as the visual and noise pollution – and even caused some to consider moving house.

Changes were made to the water mist system at the station, controlled by the environmental services company Veolia, last year in an attempt to improve the situation.

However these have been dubbed by Ted Power, Conservation Representative for the Round Hill Society Committee, as “inadequate”, describing the stench as “objectionable”.

The new and improved system will use cylinders to operate a UV radiation that will destroy odour molecules and increase the efficiency of odour management.

Kelly Booth, a South Downs representative for Veolia, said: “It is a completely different way of combating the odour problem.

“Rather than suppressing the chemicals and odours, it works to destroy the bacteria or fungi that create the odour in the first place.”

Veolia were unable to disclose the cost of such developments, but stress that “the new system is a massive step to improve the service that we provide.”

However, Power said he had reservations about logistics of the new technology.

He said: “Will they be able to neutralise the odour molecules before they escape?”

At the moment, odour complaints are being received all year round, but they peak during the summer when residents spend more time outside.

Comments (12)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:08pm Thu 3 Jan 13

Hove Actually says...

It just goes to prove the dis-jointed thinking that goes on in the council...

Who ever heard of a smell coming from a waste station, and why bother dealing with it at the planning stage when it's only the mushrooms (fed on **** and kept in the dark) who will be affected anyway
It just goes to prove the dis-jointed thinking that goes on in the council... Who ever heard of a smell coming from a waste station, and why bother dealing with it at the planning stage when it's only the mushrooms (fed on **** and kept in the dark) who will be affected anyway Hove Actually
  • Score: 0

12:17pm Thu 3 Jan 13

NickBtn says...

This location isn't suitable. It could be argued when there was good road access with a dual carriageway from the A27.

Now, with even more council dis-jointed thinking (thanks Hove Actually) - the Lewes Road will become single carriageway with a new bus lane. This will mean that the recycling lorries from around the county will need to wait in new queues, polluting more and costing time/money.
This location isn't suitable. It could be argued when there was good road access with a dual carriageway from the A27. Now, with even more council dis-jointed thinking (thanks Hove Actually) - the Lewes Road will become single carriageway with a new bus lane. This will mean that the recycling lorries from around the county will need to wait in new queues, polluting more and costing time/money. NickBtn
  • Score: 0

12:32pm Thu 3 Jan 13

Fight_Back says...

So let me get this right - the waste station stinks ? I'm sure my memory remembers both the Labour council, Labour councillors and the waste company promising this wouldn't be the case when locals were objecting to the plans. So Labour and Veolia BOTH lied !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So let me get this right - the waste station stinks ? I'm sure my memory remembers both the Labour council, Labour councillors and the waste company promising this wouldn't be the case when locals were objecting to the plans. So Labour and Veolia BOTH lied !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Fight_Back
  • Score: 0

12:37pm Thu 3 Jan 13

Mr P Brown says...

NickBtn wrote:
This location isn't suitable. It could be argued when there was good road access with a dual carriageway from the A27.

Now, with even more council dis-jointed thinking (thanks Hove Actually) - the Lewes Road will become single carriageway with a new bus lane. This will mean that the recycling lorries from around the county will need to wait in new queues, polluting more and costing time/money.
They got round this problem by conveniently leaving HGV's off the consultation documents.
[quote][p][bold]NickBtn[/bold] wrote: This location isn't suitable. It could be argued when there was good road access with a dual carriageway from the A27. Now, with even more council dis-jointed thinking (thanks Hove Actually) - the Lewes Road will become single carriageway with a new bus lane. This will mean that the recycling lorries from around the county will need to wait in new queues, polluting more and costing time/money.[/p][/quote]They got round this problem by conveniently leaving HGV's off the consultation documents. Mr P Brown
  • Score: 0

1:45pm Thu 3 Jan 13

jools99 says...

This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog!
This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog! jools99
  • Score: 0

2:52pm Thu 3 Jan 13

Fight_Back says...

jools99 wrote:
This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog!
I think it's more that politicians from all parties will lie to get what they want. Look at Labours lies over this and the King Alfred. look at the Lib Dem and Norman Baker lies over the Amex stadium. Look at the Tory lies over the marina development. Look at the Green lies in general.
[quote][p][bold]jools99[/bold] wrote: This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog![/p][/quote]I think it's more that politicians from all parties will lie to get what they want. Look at Labours lies over this and the King Alfred. look at the Lib Dem and Norman Baker lies over the Amex stadium. Look at the Tory lies over the marina development. Look at the Green lies in general. Fight_Back
  • Score: 0

3:13pm Thu 3 Jan 13

NickBtn says...

Fight_Back wrote:
jools99 wrote:
This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog!
I think it's more that politicians from all parties will lie to get what they want. Look at Labours lies over this and the King Alfred. look at the Lib Dem and Norman Baker lies over the Amex stadium. Look at the Tory lies over the marina development. Look at the Green lies in general.
It really is a case of the politicians think they know best and don't want to listen to ideas and concerns.

Unfortunately it seems to be true for all parties. I hoped that the greens would be different - be more consultative and pragmatic. The opposite seems to be true and that, combined with extreme policies, will see them only having one term (probably anywhere if people learn/see what's happened in Brighton and Hove).

The real pity is that so much creative energy goes in from politicians and council officers (see P Brown's comment) to get a flawed idea through rather than listen, revise, improve and get what's best.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jools99[/bold] wrote: This just goes to confirm (as we already know) that the Council does not listen to the valid objections raised at the so-called consultation stage. The issue of bad odours was raised at the public meetings (I know, as I raised this issue at a public meeting held in the Stanford Avenue Methodist Church) and the meeting was assured that this would not happen. This Council goes through the motions of public consultation and then does exactly what it had originally planned. The Council and Councillors should remember that they are supposed to serve the community and listen to valid objections to schemes and make adaptations, but they rarely do so. It's a case of the tail wagging the dog![/p][/quote]I think it's more that politicians from all parties will lie to get what they want. Look at Labours lies over this and the King Alfred. look at the Lib Dem and Norman Baker lies over the Amex stadium. Look at the Tory lies over the marina development. Look at the Green lies in general.[/p][/quote]It really is a case of the politicians think they know best and don't want to listen to ideas and concerns. Unfortunately it seems to be true for all parties. I hoped that the greens would be different - be more consultative and pragmatic. The opposite seems to be true and that, combined with extreme policies, will see them only having one term (probably anywhere if people learn/see what's happened in Brighton and Hove). The real pity is that so much creative energy goes in from politicians and council officers (see P Brown's comment) to get a flawed idea through rather than listen, revise, improve and get what's best. NickBtn
  • Score: 0

3:42pm Thu 3 Jan 13

Tis I says...

So is this safe to burn in the Newhaven incinerator (sorry energy from waste facility) when it gets there?
So is this safe to burn in the Newhaven incinerator (sorry energy from waste facility) when it gets there? Tis I
  • Score: 0

4:38pm Thu 3 Jan 13

twosugars says...

Fight_Back wrote:
So let me get this right - the waste station stinks ? I'm sure my memory remembers both the Labour council, Labour councillors and the waste company promising this wouldn't be the case when locals were objecting to the plans. So Labour and Veolia BOTH lied !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No suprise there then, Newhaven incinerator absolutely reeks when the wind is anywhere other than south westerly. they told us the fumes from the incinerator would be "cleaned" but the real stink comes from the piles of rubbish waiting to be burned
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: So let me get this right - the waste station stinks ? I'm sure my memory remembers both the Labour council, Labour councillors and the waste company promising this wouldn't be the case when locals were objecting to the plans. So Labour and Veolia BOTH lied !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]No suprise there then, Newhaven incinerator absolutely reeks when the wind is anywhere other than south westerly. they told us the fumes from the incinerator would be "cleaned" but the real stink comes from the piles of rubbish waiting to be burned twosugars
  • Score: 0

4:40pm Thu 3 Jan 13

Thumper Hove says...

I'm only surprised by the 'revelation' that a waste station stinks! What did people think it was going to be like - roses and jasmine scented air?

What next? If you don't water plants they die?
I'm only surprised by the 'revelation' that a waste station stinks! What did people think it was going to be like - roses and jasmine scented air? What next? If you don't water plants they die? Thumper Hove
  • Score: 0

4:55pm Thu 3 Jan 13

cookie_brighton says...

I see no mention of the offence of polluting the atmosphere in the story.
If it were you or I causing the smell, the environmental department would be onto us and charge us with the offence.
I see no mention of the offence of polluting the atmosphere in the story. If it were you or I causing the smell, the environmental department would be onto us and charge us with the offence. cookie_brighton
  • Score: 0

7:08am Fri 4 Jan 13

Old Ale Man says...

Our then Counsillor Kevin Allen spoke against this application at the planning meeting and now what he said has all come true and it was his own Labour councillor colleauges who did not support him and allowed this monstrosity to be built.
Our then Counsillor Kevin Allen spoke against this application at the planning meeting and now what he said has all come true and it was his own Labour councillor colleauges who did not support him and allowed this monstrosity to be built. Old Ale Man
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree