I READ with interest Mr Ramsay’s letter regarding traffic flows for the energy plant.

I did not see any figures for the number of HGVs required to remove toxic waste from the site, but that is by-the-by.

Until Tata/Brunner Mond knows exactly where the 600,000 tonnes of waste is coming from – potentially anywhere in the UK – the traffic movement figures are pie in the sky.

My concern, as a local resident, is not how many HGVs will be travelling along the A530 between 8am and 9am on a Monday morning or how many HGVs will be going round the Morrisons roundabout at 2.30pm on a Wednesday afternoon.

My concern is that the plans for this colossal waste incinerator should not be given approval. Two points make me steadfast in my opposition to Tata/Brunner Mond’s incinerator and the process of incineration itself.

On a House of Commons website, I read ‘the new generation of incinerators are far safer than the older generation, but just how safe, we do not know’ and ‘waste incinerators tend to be built in the poorer parts of the country or where there is least opposition.’ Incineration is a process surrounded by controversy.

I have read lengthy reports, for and against, by eminent medical and scientific figures.

The impact of incineration on health and the environment is one big minefield. This could perhaps be the reason why some councils have ‘no incineration’ policies.

If Tata/Brunner Mond is given permission to build and operate a 600,000-tonne capacity incinerator at Lostock, local residents will be living under the shadow of this incinerator for the next 25 years.

Do we really want to be human guinea pigs in an experiment to test the safety of the process of incineration?

Our safety and wellbeing is far too high a price to pay to facilitate the financial enrichment of a very wealthy company.

SUE STATHAM Wincham