I REFER to the letter in the Guardian (August 18) by Neal Chamberlain of Brunner Mond) concerning inaccurate comments portrayed as fact on the Guardian’s website.

If one is intending to give a balanced viewpoint on the subject of the proposed Brunner Mond incinerator, it is preferable to present all the facts, not just those that support the particular case you wish to make.

Readers should also be aware of the following issues which, to the best of my knowledge, represent fact in this argument.

Cheshire Ant-incinerator Network (CHAIN) does not understand why people refer to reduction in carbon dioxide but conveniently leave out the fact incinerators produce very large quantities of carbon dioxide in the burning process.

DEFRA (the official Government body) gives the fact that up to a tonne of carbon dioxide is produced for every tonne of waste burned. Therefore 600,000 tonnes per annum of waste burned by the proposed Brunner Mond plant would produce a substantial amount of CO2.

In other so called power plants, legislation is going down the route of carbon sequestration (carbon capture) to lower these emissions.

Why is there no mention of CO2 production or capture in the Brunner Mond proposals?

CHAIN fully supports the ‘Regeneration of Northwich Project’ and wishes it every success. However, it also believes the project team should be composed of entirely independent members.

CHAIN is of the view that where a possibility of vested interests could happen, the whole project team would have a greater credibility if it collectively had no interests whatsoever in any of the possible schemes under discussion.

CHAIN does not need to spell out what any increase in traffic movements in the areas of Griffiths Road, King Street and the by-pass would have.

Local people, those who use these roads every day, are only too well aware of the current constricted traffic situation.

Why do so called experts carry out traffic assessments on any particular project and completely ignore the current traffic movements and those of projected movements for other traffic in the planning pipeline?

Mr Chamberlain’s comments would make more sense if he had combined those figures for Brunner Mond’s proposed project plus those for existing traffic (private vehicles); existing traffic (Brunner Mond, Ineos Chlor, Richards Transport etc) and for new projects in the pipeline – Bedminster, Edelchemic, Broadthorn (already sanctioned); Viridor (in planning discussions).

Come on Brunner Mond. Present the real picture, not just your own vehicle movements.

I hope the above presents a balanced view and helps Northwich people to understand the bigger picture.