Waste removal at Lawrence site causing bad smell in Kidderminster

Kidderminster Shuttle: Waste removal at Lawrence site causing bad smell in Kidderminster Waste removal at Lawrence site causing bad smell in Kidderminster

WORK to remove waste at the former Lawrence Recycling site following its devastating blaze last year has been temporarily stopped after complaints were made about the smell.

The disturbance of waste at The Forge, in Stourport Road, has been producing the odour, which Public Health England claim will not "bring about any negative effects" to health.

The Environment Agency (EA) has been working with the new owners while they clear the site.

The site was sold after Lawrence Recycling went into administration after two major fires hit the firm in just seven months.

An EA spokeswoman said: "The new owners of The Forge have started clearing the waste remaining at the site following the fire in June 2013.

"Some odour may be caused during this process as the waste is disturbed, but this should reduce quickly after the waste movements stop.

"We are working closely with the owners to ensure that the waste is being taken to the correct disposal point.

"Waste movements have stopped temporarily following concerns about this work. We will update the local community when odorous waste is moved again.

"The environmental permit is still suspended to stop new waste being brought onto the site and no waste has entered the site since June 2013.

"We have sought advice from Public Health England (PHE) regarding any health implications from the odour. "

A PHE spokesman said: “The sense of smell is extremely sensitive and people can detect odours from chemicals in very low concentrations, typically far below any level that could bring about any negative effects to their health.

“While the smell is unpleasant, the possibility that any odours could represent an actual risk to the public’s health is minimal, especially considering the short term nature of exposure.”

Anyone with concerns about the ongoing works can call the Environment Agency on 0800 807060 or for more information on odours from PHE visit hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1309970436356

Comments (20)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:33pm Thu 16 Jan 14

stour67 says...

Unpleasant it was the smell of burning oil ,thought my car engine had sprung an oil leak and pulled over to check.
Unpleasant it was the smell of burning oil ,thought my car engine had sprung an oil leak and pulled over to check. stour67

6:43pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Saintinexile says...

Thank goodness for that , I put the smell down to the bull**** from up the road at the WFDC
Thank goodness for that , I put the smell down to the bull**** from up the road at the WFDC Saintinexile

7:03pm Thu 16 Jan 14

stour67 says...

I was bad but not that bad , did not throw up lol
I was bad but not that bad , did not throw up lol stour67

9:07pm Thu 16 Jan 14

MRSDEAKIN says...

was just about to ask the mechanic about my car when i realised it was not my car it was half the town! my son has a chest condition and is now coughing and wheezing so much for no health effects
was just about to ask the mechanic about my car when i realised it was not my car it was half the town! my son has a chest condition and is now coughing and wheezing so much for no health effects MRSDEAKIN

9:48pm Thu 16 Jan 14

stour67 says...

Who said recycling was good for the planet ,do not here much from green peace ,or the green party when this type of thing happens on here.
Who said recycling was good for the planet ,do not here much from green peace ,or the green party when this type of thing happens on here. stour67

10:13pm Thu 16 Jan 14

Stephen Brown says...

Lawrence fire wasn't about 'recycling' because the fire was RDF bales of inflammable compacted waste intended for burning in incinerators and caused by poor management technique and ineffective regulation. That's why it burnt so well.

In fact, there are over 300 such fires every year and teh number has been rising. An industry operating under a banner of recycling when it is in fact nothing tof the sort.

It was Friends of The Earth and Green Party that led the petition and lobbied the MP and council to do something about it and that battle has now gone national.
Lawrence fire wasn't about 'recycling' because the fire was RDF bales of inflammable compacted waste intended for burning in incinerators and caused by poor management technique and ineffective regulation. That's why it burnt so well. In fact, there are over 300 such fires every year and teh number has been rising. An industry operating under a banner of recycling when it is in fact nothing tof the sort. It was Friends of The Earth and Green Party that led the petition and lobbied the MP and council to do something about it and that battle has now gone national. Stephen Brown

9:56am Fri 17 Jan 14

sonofbaldwin says...

"That's why it burnt so well."
On the contrary Stephen, as I understand it the bails that didnt burn were so tightly packed that they could have potentially retained embers and other sources of ignition that could have flared up at any time immediately after the initial incident.
That was why the fire brigade had to attend for several weeks after the initial blaze.
Had they 'burnt well', the remediation would have been alot less intensive!
"That's why it burnt so well." On the contrary Stephen, as I understand it the bails that didnt burn were so tightly packed that they could have potentially retained embers and other sources of ignition that could have flared up at any time immediately after the initial incident. That was why the fire brigade had to attend for several weeks after the initial blaze. Had they 'burnt well', the remediation would have been alot less intensive! sonofbaldwin

10:55am Fri 17 Jan 14

Stephen Brown says...

Sonofbaldwin may have a point but there were other elements at play over why the incindent went on so long, not least because of pollution into the water system, health and safety, and the wrangle about who was going to pay to put it out - which in my view was one of the biggest as the taxpayer ended up about £500,000 out of pocket. Multiply that on a country wide basis to a greater or lesser degree and you can start to see the scale of the problem. The other issue being just how much harm it has done to the local environment and population in terms of dioxins, furans etc which in my view the authorities massaged down in terms of a threat and in the case of health issues they simply don't have the statistical systems to monitor it properly.

My original and main point stands however, this is not about recycling because it was about waste derived fuel intended for incinerators. Incinerators are not a good idea either in my view on a number of levels. And of course, this fuel is designed to burn and the severity and frequency of such fires highlights it. The authorities know it but seem unable or unwilling to do anything meaningful about it. The question as to 'why' is a whole topic in itself.
Sonofbaldwin may have a point but there were other elements at play over why the incindent went on so long, not least because of pollution into the water system, health and safety, and the wrangle about who was going to pay to put it out - which in my view was one of the biggest as the taxpayer ended up about £500,000 out of pocket. Multiply that on a country wide basis to a greater or lesser degree and you can start to see the scale of the problem. The other issue being just how much harm it has done to the local environment and population in terms of dioxins, furans etc which in my view the authorities massaged down in terms of a threat and in the case of health issues they simply don't have the statistical systems to monitor it properly. My original and main point stands however, this is not about recycling because it was about waste derived fuel intended for incinerators. Incinerators are not a good idea either in my view on a number of levels. And of course, this fuel is designed to burn and the severity and frequency of such fires highlights it. The authorities know it but seem unable or unwilling to do anything meaningful about it. The question as to 'why' is a whole topic in itself. Stephen Brown

11:50am Fri 17 Jan 14

Kiddypaul81 says...

Mrs Deakin - I have a cough and chest infection, I wonder if this could be the cause.....

I haven't been to Kidderminster in 6 months, but who knows. Surely coincedences don't just happen!!
Mrs Deakin - I have a cough and chest infection, I wonder if this could be the cause..... I haven't been to Kidderminster in 6 months, but who knows. Surely coincedences don't just happen!! Kiddypaul81

12:05pm Fri 17 Jan 14

sonofbaldwin says...

"The other issue being just how much harm it has done to the local environment and population in terms of dioxins, furans etc which in my view the authorities massaged down in terms of a threat and in the case of health issues they simply don't have the statistical systems to monitor it properly."

Thanks for the reply. Am I right in recalling extra monitoring was carried out to attempt to quantify this potential effect. If so, do you know what the outcome was?
"The other issue being just how much harm it has done to the local environment and population in terms of dioxins, furans etc which in my view the authorities massaged down in terms of a threat and in the case of health issues they simply don't have the statistical systems to monitor it properly." Thanks for the reply. Am I right in recalling extra monitoring was carried out to attempt to quantify this potential effect. If so, do you know what the outcome was? sonofbaldwin

12:44pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Bcfc1186 says...

I wondered how long it would take for people to start blaming this for unrelated health issues!

Always looking for something or someone to blame!
I wondered how long it would take for people to start blaming this for unrelated health issues! Always looking for something or someone to blame! Bcfc1186

3:10pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Stephen Brown says...

Yes sonofbaldwin pressure from campaigners did result in such tests. However, FOI and other challenges lead me to a conclusion the tests were inadequate, in the wrong place, at the wrong time and too much guess work made in the subsequent calculations using assumptions rather than fact to present a massaged outcome which Public Health England spun at WFDC request to make them look better. So were they meaningful? Probably not. But they still concluded the ingestation for adults was 5 times higher than 'normal' per day. Remember non of these pollutants are exactly good for you as there are no 'safe' levels for dioxins furans etc.
Yes sonofbaldwin pressure from campaigners did result in such tests. However, FOI and other challenges lead me to a conclusion the tests were inadequate, in the wrong place, at the wrong time and too much guess work made in the subsequent calculations using assumptions rather than fact to present a massaged outcome which Public Health England spun at WFDC request to make them look better. So were they meaningful? Probably not. But they still concluded the ingestation for adults was 5 times higher than 'normal' per day. Remember non of these pollutants are exactly good for you as there are no 'safe' levels for dioxins furans etc. Stephen Brown

5:51pm Fri 17 Jan 14

stour67 says...

Was led to beleave there are massive oil tanks and oil sumps that used to feed the massive lathes etc that used to be used by folkes under the floors, have they been drained or is that the smell now as they are being uncovered in the clean up of the burnt out buildings.
Was led to beleave there are massive oil tanks and oil sumps that used to feed the massive lathes etc that used to be used by folkes under the floors, have they been drained or is that the smell now as they are being uncovered in the clean up of the burnt out buildings. stour67

5:54pm Fri 17 Jan 14

stour67 says...

I was told this on a factory visit when folkes were still machining the forgings,and when i mean massive bigger than good size house you could drop in them.
I was told this on a factory visit when folkes were still machining the forgings,and when i mean massive bigger than good size house you could drop in them. stour67

10:40pm Fri 17 Jan 14

Green Olive says...

There is a “bad smell” about the Lawrence Fire. The cost to the local council, Environment Agency and fire services was nearly £500,000 and it is highly likely that none of this will ever be repaid since the company has gone into administration.
The air testing showed atmospheric levels of dioxins, furans several hundred times the UK average. Public Health England was then asked by the district council to “interpret” these results. In their report they calculate that the daily intake would be 5 times above the safe limit. What is missing from their report is that measurements were only done for only 17 out of the 50 days the fire burned for and that the measurements started on the 3rd July 18 days after the fire started, when the intensity of the fire had considerable declined. How much higher would the level of pollutants been when the fire was at its peak? The reports were on the district council website but were quickly removed after the fire ended.
There is also the suspicion that the reason the fire went on for so long was wrangling about who would pay the costs. Initially there was optimism. A fire service spokesman in late June was quoted as saying it would be over in a week or so and there was no need to get in a specialist contractor to demolish the building. However by the 12th July the Chief Executive of the council was saying that there would be a new strategy and equipment would be moved onto the site. About a week later the various agencies involved agreed to foot the bill, but it still took until August 7th to finally extinguish the fire.
The council, Environment Agency and fire service dealt with this emergency in a confused and uncoordinated manner. What happened to emergency planning? The residents of Wyre Forest suffered harm to their health and well being while the authorities dithered.
There is a “bad smell” about the Lawrence Fire. The cost to the local council, Environment Agency and fire services was nearly £500,000 and it is highly likely that none of this will ever be repaid since the company has gone into administration. The air testing showed atmospheric levels of dioxins, furans several hundred times the UK average. Public Health England was then asked by the district council to “interpret” these results. In their report they calculate that the daily intake would be 5 times above the safe limit. What is missing from their report is that measurements were only done for only 17 out of the 50 days the fire burned for and that the measurements started on the 3rd July 18 days after the fire started, when the intensity of the fire had considerable declined. How much higher would the level of pollutants been when the fire was at its peak? The reports were on the district council website but were quickly removed after the fire ended. There is also the suspicion that the reason the fire went on for so long was wrangling about who would pay the costs. Initially there was optimism. A fire service spokesman in late June was quoted as saying it would be over in a week or so and there was no need to get in a specialist contractor to demolish the building. However by the 12th July the Chief Executive of the council was saying that there would be a new strategy and equipment would be moved onto the site. About a week later the various agencies involved agreed to foot the bill, but it still took until August 7th to finally extinguish the fire. The council, Environment Agency and fire service dealt with this emergency in a confused and uncoordinated manner. What happened to emergency planning? The residents of Wyre Forest suffered harm to their health and well being while the authorities dithered. Green Olive

1:40pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Shibdrift says...

"Bad smell" caused by waste!? That's nothing compared to the bad smell that is alleged to have been left by the lack of someone paying their share of employees tax/national insurance contributions?? Now that could well be a real "STINK", but does anyone care - doubtful.
"Bad smell" caused by waste!? That's nothing compared to the bad smell that is alleged to have been left by the lack of someone paying their share of employees tax/national insurance contributions?? Now that could well be a real "STINK", but does anyone care - doubtful. Shibdrift

8:58pm Mon 20 Jan 14

MRSDEAKIN says...

Bcfc1186 wrote:
I wondered how long it would take for people to start blaming this for unrelated health issues!

Always looking for something or someone to blame!
don't be foolish picking one comment out of a paragraph to snipe at someone for what is the point of it
[quote][p][bold]Bcfc1186[/bold] wrote: I wondered how long it would take for people to start blaming this for unrelated health issues! Always looking for something or someone to blame![/p][/quote]don't be foolish picking one comment out of a paragraph to snipe at someone for what is the point of it MRSDEAKIN

6:47am Wed 22 Jan 14

davewal says...

The facts are the District council have nothing to do with environmental health. This is now the Worcester regulatory authority. They were there in attendance monitoring the air and the situation within hours. The fire brigade were consulted and the dousing of the fire was stopped as a result of the water used draining into the canal and damaging the ecosystem surrounding it by creating low oxygen levels. This was the reason why it was left to burn. The qualified and experienced environment agency chose the best option in the circumstances with all the facts at their disposal. Their was no conspiracy and now the area is much healthier than it was when the recycling plant was there. Less seagulls and flies for a start. So crack on with your pot stirring and conspiracy theories. Lets not forget there are politicians hoping to gain votes on this forum so the conjecture and statements presented are more than likely biased. Why not see common sense and realise that to create the fantasy world that is being describe, there would have to be a multi agency meeting between the fire brigade, the county council, the district council and Worcester regulatory services and then all these people would have to decide to poison the residents of Foley park. How ridiculous does that sound. The people responsible for this are Lawrences and they are still working. The law should change to stop businesses operating in any guise, once incidents like this have occurred. The response to the fire by the relevant authorities was excellent and they should be commended in saving the environment surrounding the site.
The facts are the District council have nothing to do with environmental health. This is now the Worcester regulatory authority. They were there in attendance monitoring the air and the situation within hours. The fire brigade were consulted and the dousing of the fire was stopped as a result of the water used draining into the canal and damaging the ecosystem surrounding it by creating low oxygen levels. This was the reason why it was left to burn. The qualified and experienced environment agency chose the best option in the circumstances with all the facts at their disposal. Their was no conspiracy and now the area is much healthier than it was when the recycling plant was there. Less seagulls and flies for a start. So crack on with your pot stirring and conspiracy theories. Lets not forget there are politicians hoping to gain votes on this forum so the conjecture and statements presented are more than likely biased. Why not see common sense and realise that to create the fantasy world that is being describe, there would have to be a multi agency meeting between the fire brigade, the county council, the district council and Worcester regulatory services and then all these people would have to decide to poison the residents of Foley park. How ridiculous does that sound. The people responsible for this are Lawrences and they are still working. The law should change to stop businesses operating in any guise, once incidents like this have occurred. The response to the fire by the relevant authorities was excellent and they should be commended in saving the environment surrounding the site. davewal

7:33am Wed 22 Jan 14

jon cooper says...

I think 'davewal' has pretty much hit the nail firmly on the head, and I have no doubt whatsoever that he'll be voted down for it, (refresh and dislike), for stating the blunt truth !!
I think 'davewal' has pretty much hit the nail firmly on the head, and I have no doubt whatsoever that he'll be voted down for it, (refresh and dislike), for stating the blunt truth !! jon cooper

12:03pm Thu 23 Jan 14

Bcfc1186 says...

MRSDEAKIN wrote:
Bcfc1186 wrote: I wondered how long it would take for people to start blaming this for unrelated health issues! Always looking for something or someone to blame!
don't be foolish picking one comment out of a paragraph to snipe at someone for what is the point of it
What does that sentence even mean?
[quote][p][bold]MRSDEAKIN[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bcfc1186[/bold] wrote: I wondered how long it would take for people to start blaming this for unrelated health issues! Always looking for something or someone to blame![/p][/quote]don't be foolish picking one comment out of a paragraph to snipe at someone for what is the point of it[/p][/quote]What does that sentence even mean? Bcfc1186

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

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