"Please explain the chemical of hydrogen sulphide and the medical issues that its causing is it poisonous not just an odour?"
It is more than an odour, at sufficiently high levels, it is toxic. Previous air monitoring studies of the site have indicated that the World Health Organisation (WHO) odour-nuisance guidelines had been exceeded, but this current monitoring is the first time WHO health-based guidelines have been breached. Odour alone can lead to many psychosomatic effects, such as headaches, anxiety and insomnia, but the levels that were recorded in March could lead to direct health effects such as watery eyes, sore throats etc… The long-term health effects of a prolonged exposure to hydrogen sulphide are not well-known. However, a study by Francesco Mataloni indicated an increase in lung cancer risk associated with long-term exposure to landfill gases in general, using hydrogen sulphide as the tracer for this study.
"Are you (Mick) confident that the odour will not be as strong from the 30th? Will there be a punishment for red if the odour is as strong as it is now from that date?"
Not confident. The cap is just one part of the gas management system. The wells need to be connected to the gas management system, and then balanced accordingly, which is a delicate process that will take some time to get right, but should gradually reduce odours sometime after 30th April. Additionally, Cells 3 & 4 will not be capped, instead relying on nightly cover to mitigate fugitive odours. This is very sensitive to the depth and quality of cover material used. With regard to the punishment, I have received a tip-off from Sophie Calvert of BBC Radio Stoke that news on that is due this Friday (30th April).
"Roughly how many years after fully capping will it take before the odour to drastically reduce?"
I do not have the experience to make a judgement on this. In fact, I do not believe anyone does, given that the site is unusually deep for its footprint size, so is unique in that aspect. December 2026 should be the date that permanent caps start to be applied to the remaining uncapped cells (3, 4 & 2), which improves the seal to the atmosphere, and also makes managing the gas management easier. So over the space of 2027, I would expect to see (smell) considerable improvement.
"What is the EAs next move if the April 30 deadline is not met?"
Enforcement extension, financial penalties, permit suspension. We will know more on the 30th."So, is it clear what it is that has caused the high levels of odour in recent months, and is anyone (e.g. EA, RED, the council) putting in place a procedure to ensure this is not going to continue when they start filling the other cells?"
This is my concern: the EA’s Mobile Monitoring Facilities (MMFs) are only guaranteed to be in place until August, then what? I do not believe it will ever get this bad again, since there is too much pressure and scrutiny from the community and the regulators to allow such a snowball effect again. Additionally, Cell 1 was the first to be filled, so it may contain gypsum waste with up to 10% sulphate content, which was permitted to be mixed with organic waste until the regulations were reviewed in April 2009 (banning all gypsum waste from being mixed with organic waste due to hydrogen sulphide production). Cells 3, 4 & 2 should not have this waste, so hydrogen sulphide production should be lower than Cell 1. Ideally, I would like to see the EA’s MMFs replaced with a permanent hydrogen sulphide monitoring solution. Something like an Acrulog H2S PPB in a suitable housing, which can report data over 4G data networks in real-time, giving an early-warning system to residents, regulators and the operators.
"How often are landfills require to cover the rubbish with soil etc to prevent odour?"
At the end of every working day.
"Please can you tell us what has been excepted at landfill we seen containers with liquid and yellow refuse bags?"
Yellow bags (infectious clinical waste) has been observed in skips at the landfill site. This waste is not permitted for landfill, but equally, no one has observed these going into the landfill, so we can only assume that it hasn’t, based on the evidence currently before us. As for Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBCs), we have seen these put into the landfill site, which is acceptable if the product is solidified. However, photographs have emerged of an IBC in the site that has been damaged and spilled a white liquid out, which is not permitted, since no liquids are permitted in the permit.
"Is there a figure for how many gas wells each cell should have, did the permit change re gas management when tonnage was increased?"
This one is not an exact science, but would be covered in the gas management plan for the site. We know that the gas management plan was found to be deficient, since the EA have requested that this was reviewed and improved. The gas management plant (3 generators, 2 flares) is more than adequate for the volume of gas expected, it appears to be capture of the gas that is proving technically challenging.
"Are they looking to investigate what has actually been included In Cell 1/2? I guess there's no way to know what was potentially snuck in, but I heard they were drilling down to test the waste? Not sure what truth there is in this?"
I expect an announcement about the investigation on the 30th. Otherwise, I will leverage my contacts to obtain this information for you.
"BBC Midlands Today reported tonight that local residents are crowd funding to buy air purifiers. I would like to ask are these likely to be effective, and if so, should Red be paying for them?"
To be effective, they will need to be the activated charcoal/carbon types since simple HEPA filters are ineffective for gases. HOWEVER, if someone has already bought a simple HEPA filter, please keep your mouth closed. Many of the indirect health effects are caused by the worry of the odours. If their HEPA filter diminishes that worry, even though it is a placebo, then it is still doing its job. Don’t ruin it for them, particularly since a higher-priced activated carbon filter may be beyond their financial means.
"Do we know why sometimes the odour does not follow the wind direction? Has this been proven or correlated?"
With the anaerobic action of bacteria within the landfill, the site is slightly warmer than its surroundings, creating an atmospheric thermal, with some odd distribution effects.
"I have started to wonder whether, when the wind speed is very low, that the odour circles around more? but I am not a scientist."
That’s correct, the wind creates turbulence, which helps to disperse the gases. If the wind speed is very low, only the much slower process of diffusion is dispersing the gas, so it lingers.
"My colleague at Keele, Sharon George, said that plaster gives rise to H2S, that is not allowed in landfill, but that it is hard to monitor this - any truth in that?"
Up until April 2009, gypsum and plaster with up to 10% sulphate content was permitted to be mixed with organic waste. Since the site has been filling since 2007, there is probably this waste at the base of Cell 1. Beyond, April 2009, gypsum and plaster must be put into a dedicated cell, which inevitably increases disposal cost, so there is an incentive for unscrupulous waste handlers to not bother to separate wastes before disposal at Walley’s Quarry.
"How do we scientifically prove the odour is coming from the site?"
The four-point MMF study, using the weather data and readings to provide a narrow directional cone. Where the four directional cones cross, that’s your source.
"Do we know if the liner is fit for all of this extra tonnage of waste?"
Yes, it should be. The tonnage of waste is to remain the same, it is the tonnes per year (rate of fill) that has increased with the October 2020 permit variation.
"Is there any chance of the permit being extended past 2026?"
It is actually the planning permission that gives that date, rather than the permit, which would be the decision of Staffordshire County Council. Given the pressure on the council on this matter, I think an extension is unlikely. However, it is worth keeping an eye on these developments in Derbyshire: (‘Residents fear the summer’: Landfill site near Chesterfield granted 14-year extension – despite objections | Derbyshire Times)
"Mick, did I hear that correct - did you say that the EA has measured the highest levels of H2S around landfill sites at this location ever?"
Yes, you heard correctly. On the 24-hour average (criterion for WHO health-based guidelines), off-site measurements for Walley’s Quarry Landfill are higher than any site the EA has regulated since 2014. It is also the only site in that period that has exceeded the WHO health-based guideline.
Note the following questions are paraphrased, since they are based on my summary notes.
"Query regarding gas well disconnection."
The CCS2 (significant) breach recorded by the EA in March was due to the gas wells being disconnected for a period longer than necessary to allow the raising of Cell 1’s profile. The gas wells were still disconnected on 29th March, as discussed at the MMF visit. The current status of the gas wells is not known to me personally.
"Is there evidence that there was a gas management system prior to 2021?"
There is much evidence of a gas management system, including all the planning documents for the gas management plant, aerial photographs and the fact that odours were not as bad before disconnection indicates a functional gas management system was in place.
"Has leaving the EU affected landfill regulation?"
Landfill regulation in the EU is appears to be spuriously lax. UK standards appear to exceed EU regulation before departure, so I would expect to remain at that standard or improve. Conflict of Interest Declaration: as a Brexiteer, I would encourage you to cross-check my evaluation.
"What if the odour goes away? Will there still be punishment?"
This is a concern: an eternal game of cat-and-mouse while the clock runs down. It is not sufficient for the odour to go away, there needs to be a plan in place by the EA to demonstrate that the site will be closely monitored and enforcement robustly issued much before any significant odour evolves. We are likely to know about punishment on the 30th April.
"What about the Human Rights Act and the right to clean air?"
This is another angle to investigate, but outside the scope of my knowledge. Firstly, the evidence needs to be gathered that the site is the source, which the 4 MMFs and Newcastle Borough Council (NBC) are working on. It is then a question for the relevant NBC officer. Darren Walters (01782 742587) is probably your best bet to discuss this angle, or at least he can put you through to the right person.
"What is the likely outcome of the current events?"
Probably a rinse-and-repeat outcome. Red Industries will make the necessary improvements, the odour will go away, we will stop complaining, the regulator will ease the pressure, then the odours will probably return and we will have to start again. Repeat N times ad-infinitum.
"What is the next action from the community?"
To start with, a bit of a waiting game to see what the multi-agency response is. Then a coherent response is needed. I believe The Landfill Stinks Cap It Off group are arranging a community liaison meeting, which could be a good time to discuss.
"Are PHE mapping health problems relative to the site?
Not that I am aware of, although a similar scheme was employed for Clayton Woods landfill in Chorley. Given the greater magnitude of complaint and off-site pollution, I would expect PHE to do this as a minimum.
Disclaimer: at the time of this Q&A session, the operator of Walley’s Quarry Landfill site was known as “Red Industries RM Ltd”, and is referred to as-such in this document. However, on the 26th April 2021, the company name was changed to “Walley’s Quarry Landfill Ltd”, and should be referred to as such going forward.