Warrenpoint: Residents have 'had enough' of port stenches
BBC News NI first reported the issue in 2023, and at that time Re-Gen said it was taking steps to reduce odours from stockpiled waste bales.But nearly two years on, campaigners insist not enough is being done to address concerns about the thousands of tonnes of waste stored at the port. Ms Weir has attended every public meeting and protest about the issue since she first noticed the smell.She said there were occasions when her family could not use their garden or even open their windows. "My husband is not a well man and the fact that he has to get into the car and go somewhere to get fresh air is just not right," she said.
What is causing the stink?
Much of the smell in recent years has been blamed on the storage of refuse-derived fuel (RDF) at Re-Gen's Warrenpoint facility. The firm processes black bin rubbish from a number of Northern Ireland councils, much of which cannot be recycled. The unrecyclable waste is packed into bales and driven to Warrenpoint to be shipped to places like Scandinavia.There, customers burn the waste to produce electricity.
Resignations over port pong
Earlier this month, two councillors quit the board of Warrenpoint Harbour Authority (WHA) in protest over the failure to resolve the odour problem. When Sinn Féin's Jim Brennan resigned, his party insisted it would not re-engage with the board "until there is a complete and permanent end to all RDF activities" at the port.The Social Democratic and Labour Party then pulled out councillor Laura Devlin, saying there was "strength in the message of leaving the board together".Independent councillor Jarlath Tinnelly is the last politician on the board.
Mr Tinnelly questioned what quitting achieved.He said he was staying on to represent the public from within WHA's boardroom. "We have made incredible strides over the past 12 months," he said. "So much so that in this calendar year of 2025, the average weekly stock of RDF being stored on site is less than 50% of actually what is permitted."The councillor added he was "not in denial" over the smell but it had "diminished greatly over the past number of months".
Smelly telegraph poles
He pointed to a separate issue when "an exceptionally large" consignment of telegraph poles were imported during last month's Wake the Giant festival.Members of the public lodged at least 25 formal complaints about a pungent smell, described as a mix of creosote and outdoor cleaning fluid.Mr Tinnelly believes the incident reignited concerns over Re-Gen's unconnected waste operation. WHA chairman Gerard O'Hare issued a statement apologising "for the odour that came from a cargo of telegraph poles" and pledged they would not be imported through the port again.Mr O'Hare declined a BBC interview request about Re-Gen's facility but said WHA is meeting the firm "to discuss odour concerns and to agree a solution".
'It's like putting aftershave on a dirty nappy'
Colum Sands, from the campaign group Rostrevor Action Respecting the Environment (RARE), said the telegraph poles incident must not distract from the ongoing Re-Gen dispute. "We're in a town of breathtaking beauty and the breath of the town is being taken away by a stench," he said.Mr Sands insisted it was "a long-term smell" which would "continue to be there so long as black bin waste comes into Warrenpoint Port". He also questioned Re-Gen's practice of spraying the bales with odour treatment."As someone said to me the other day - it's like putting aftershave on a dirty nappy, rather than changing the nappy," he said.The campaigner called the resignations a "positive" development."Sheer pressure and, I'd imagine, vote counting forced a number of politicians to make a move and of course it's very welcome," he said.
Inspectors identified problems at Re-Gen
The Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) conducts regular inspections to ensure Re-Gen complies with its waste licence.Its spokesman said monthly off-site odour assessments conducted between January and July 2025 "did not detect any odours attributable to the licenced waste facility".However, NIEA said some previous inspections identified "minor non-compliances".These included "storage outside the licence boundary, control of pests, exceedance of the three-month storage limit and control of odour" in 2023.Inspectors also recorded "further non-compliance" on odour control in June 2024.But NIEA added that Re-Gen "implemented measures to address these issues and bring themselves back into compliance". Re-Gen insists it is "fully compliant with all industry regulations". "Since June 2024, NIEA has carried out 13 inspections, all resulting in full compliance, including the most recent on 8 July 2025," the company said.
Ms Weir is aware inspectors carry out "sniff tests" near the port.But she explained the problem, and her family's plans, are determined by wind direction."If you're out here and there is a south-westerly wind - which is the prevailing wind in this area - we get the smell," she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
7 hours ago
- The Guardian
Call to make wet wipe producers pay for polluting England's waterways
Wet wipe producers should be charged to remove their pollution from England's waterways, the author of a government review into reforming the sector has said. Sewage has been a critical factor in the devastating pollution of our waterways, but other sources of pollution include microplastics, consumer products such as wet wipes, and the byproducts of modern manufacturing, such asPfas ('forever chemicals'), as well as fertiliser and pesticides from farming. Many of these have been linked to harmful effects on human health and the natural environment. The fairest way to deal with this, Sir Jon Cunliffe, a former Bank of England deputy governor, said, could be to apply the 'polluter pays' principle, whereby the company behind the pollution contributes towards its removal. 'The alternative is for everyone to pay for it through their bills, and the question is, should we spread that among everybody, or should we go through a polluter pays route? So I think, really, we should look at those routes,' he said. It has been a landmark week for the water sector, after Cunliffe published a major review containing recommendations on how to clean up England's filthy rivers and seas. The regulator Ofwat is to be abolished, the government has pledged, and a new, powerful, super-regulator created to better hold water companies to account. Campaigners welcomed many of the recommendations, in particular ending the self-monitoring of water companies, which currently voluntarily publish information on how much sewage they dump. Citizen scientists have argued for years that this system is open to under-counting, and have tried to shed light on the true amount of human waste in waterways: under new proposals sewage spills will be automatically published online. But there are those who felt this was a missed opportunity. The environment secretary, Steve Reed, took nationalisation out of the scope of the review from the outset, and also told Cunliffe not to consider more radical approaches such as turning companies into not-for-profits. This despite the fact that it is the mismanagement of water companies as much as the dumping of sewage that has enraged the public. So what of the idea that polluters – the upstream companies that generate some of the worst pollutants in our waterways such as wet wipes and Pfas – should pay? 'One of the best ways to deal with stuff not going into our rivers is not to let it into the sewers in the first place,' Cunliffe said, 'Why do we need wet wipes?' 'I have some sympathy for the water companies,' he said, 'because the drinking water system is closed and no one can touch it unless authorised to do so. The wastewater system is open. Anybody can put anything down the loo, and then at the treatment works, I've seen literally huge machines taking wet wipe mountains out of the sewage system.' Water companies claim that wet wipes, which shed microplastic particles and also build up into major blockages, are the main cause of sewage pollution. John Penicud, Southern Water's managing director for wastewater, said recently that 'the majority of wastewater pollutions are caused by wet wipes, fats, oils and grease being flushed down toilets and sinks', and called for wet wipes to be banned. The EU is introducing quaternary treatment, a more advanced method than that used in the UK. This has powerful filters that remove these trace chemicals from the water supply, but is expensive, so the bloc is looking at making the producers of these chemicals pay a levy that would then be used to create these treatment plants. Producers would be required to cover at least 80% of the costs associated with the sewage treatment upgrades necessary for removing these substances from wastewater. Cunliffe thinks the UK could look at adopting a similar approach for wet wipes; as a side-effect this would make plastic wet wipes more expensive, which would discourage their use. His report has recommended looking at adopting the EU laws in the UK, and investigating the prevalence and impact of these micropollutants in the environment and on human health. This way, he says, 'it's not the water bill payer who pays to take it out, but the people who make and buy the products … Pfas and so on will require quaternary treatment, and there are currently three levels of sewage treatment. To build another would be expensive.' The question, he said, was whether the user or the polluter paid. A Water UK spokesperson said: 'Removing Pfas 'forever chemicals' and other micropollutants from the water environment is a huge challenge because current sewage technology was never designed to deal with them. We need a national plan from government for upgrading sewage treatment that is paid for by chemical manufacturers instead of water bill payers, as well as a ban on Pfas products that will otherwise keep making the problem worse.'
Telegraph
7 hours ago
- Telegraph
My dying father was dragged through the courts after serving in the Troubles. It has to stop
The son of an elderly Troubles veteran has demanded Labour keep a law protecting former servicemen from prosecution. John Hutchings warned planned changes to the Legacy Act would mean 'taking dying people through the courts' like his father had been for actions taken decades ago in the line of duty. He urged the Government to 'stop persecuting soldiers who were trying to defend Britain', adding that 'these guys are far too old to prosecute'. Dennis Hutchings, from Cornwall, died in 2021 aged 80 while on trial over the death of John Patrick Cunningham, a 27-year-old man with learning difficulties, in County Tyrone in 1974. The veteran of the Life Guards regiment was determined to clear his name, despite suffering from kidney failure and requiring dialysis several times a week. He died alone after contracting Covid in Belfast and the trial collapsed, six years after Mr Hutchings was arrested in 2015. The 2023 Legacy Act put an end to fresh historical inquests into deaths that occurred in Northern Ireland during the Troubles, as well as civil actions. It was launched by Boris Johnson, who said the law would 'draw a line under the Troubles', and supporters said it remedied an imbalance in the treatment of both sides of the conflict. But Labour is pressing ahead with repealing elements of the Act that protected veterans from prosecution, arguing it is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. Hilary Benn, the Northern Ireland Secretary, has argued that the legislation cannot remain in place in its current form, as it is unpopular with victims groups and political parties there. In his first major intervention on the proposals, Mr Hutchings said allowing further inquests would be 'ridiculous', and described to The Telegraph the toll of the trial on his father. He described seeing his father in court in the final week of the trial: 'I thought 'he's got a week to live'. He was literally, physically drained. He was drawn, thin in the face.' The veteran's son said: 'He would have probably done that court case, finished it, got acquitted, put his arm in the air as a celebration and then probably would have died within a few days anyway. I think he was that ill, that frail at the end.' Mr Hutchings warned: 'You're dragging people through the courts like this. That's what they're doing. They're taking dying people through the courts. It's ridiculous.' Dennis Hutchings was arrested at home in 2015 over the death of Mr Cunningham, who had been running away from an Army patrol when he was shot in the back and killed in 1974. He claimed he shot high over Mr Cunningham's head just to get him to stop and that another soldier – known only as Soldier B, who had since died – told him that it was he who had fired the fatal shot. No ballistics evidence exists to prove who fired the fatal shot. Mr Hutchings was investigated at the time and subsequently cleared of all wrongdoing. His son recalled to The Telegraph flying back home to Britain from Belfast on the Friday before his father died, intending to travel back in time for proceedings to restart the following Monday. 'I got a phone call on the Sunday, just saying don't come back,' he said, as his father had contracted Covid. His father died in hospital the following Tuesday. 'What he should have been doing at his age of life is probably sitting at home reading his books, being in his lovely house, enjoying time with his friends, not fighting in court in Northern Ireland,' Mr Hutchings added. One of the more controversial elements of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement was the offering of pardons to IRA terrorists in jail and comfort letters who were on the run. The Government's Northern Ireland's veterans' tsar told The Telegraph last month that up to 70 former soldiers could face court if Labour presses ahead with its plans. In a parliamentary debate earlier this month, Labour MPs were supportive of the plans to repeal the Act, which had been part of the manifesto. But some backbenchers urged ministers to provide clarity about what it would be replaced with, and what protections veterans would receive under new laws. Mr Hutchings, 61, warned that veterans who are emotionally or mentally vulnerable 'will struggle to cope', something that his defiant father was all too aware of. 'I think because he knew he was really ill, he was basically doing it for the other soldiers that were coming behind him.' He said of his father's case: 'I don't think he thought it was going to take three or four years, I don't think he knew he was going to be so ill at the end that he was on dialysis. 'But I think originally, when we used to go to London for the demonstrations and all the other stuff, I think it gave him at his age in life something to fight for, to stay alive for.' Dennis Hutchings was supported by Johnny Mercer, a former veterans minister, who accompanied him to Belfast and helped to enact the 2023 legislation. The former minister and ex-Army captain spoke at the veteran's funeral, which took place on Armistice Day in 2021 and was attended by thousands of veterans from across the country. Mr Mercer delivered a eulogy, in which he condemned 'grotesque spectacle of what happened to Dennis in a Belfast court', describing him as 'the quintessential British non-commissioned officer'. Asked if he had a message for the Government about their plans to reverse the Act, Mr Hutchings said: 'These guys were young boys sent out there to do a very tough job. 'Most of them are fantastic guys. Stop prosecuting them and just look at the rest of the problems that this country has and try and deal with that first instead of wasting money on this. These guys are old and frail. Leave them alone.' Dennis Hutchings had been a familiar face at veterans' protests up until his death, but with the prospect of the Legacy Act being undone, the demonstrations started again without him. But his son said: 'I think my Dad, even though he would have been found not guilty in court, would be beside them now, still fighting for every single one of them.' He added: 'I think he would just carry on doing that until he did pass away. I think he would be up in London, in court with the guys behind him fighting their cases as well.'
The Guardian
14 hours ago
- The Guardian
Make wet wipe producers pay for polluting England's waterways, says report
Wet wipe producers should be charged to remove their pollution from England's waterways, the author of a government review into reforming the sector says. Sewage has been a critical factor in the devastating pollution of our waterways, but other sources of pollution include microplastics, consumer products such as wet wipes, and the byproducts of modern manufacturing, such asPfas ('forever chemicals'), as well as fertiliser and pesticides from farming. Many of these have been linked to harmful effects on human health and the natural environment. The fairest way to deal with this, Sir Jon Cunliffe, a former Bank of England deputy governor, said, could be to apply the 'polluter pays' principle, whereby the company behind the pollution contributes towards its removal. 'The alternative is for everyone to pay for it through their bills, and the question is, should we spread that among everybody, or should we go through a polluter pays route? So I think, really, we should look at those routes,' he said. It has been a landmark week for the water sector, after Cunliffe published a major review containing recommendations on how to clean up England's filthy rivers and seas. The regulator Ofwat is to be abolished, the government has pledged, and a new, powerful, super-regulator created to better hold water companies to account. Campaigners welcomed many of the recommendations, in particular ending the self-monitoring of water companies, which currently voluntarily publish information on how much sewage they dump. Citizen scientists have argued for years that this system is open to under-counting, and have tried to shed light on the true amount of human waste in waterways: under new proposals sewage spills will be automatically published online. But there are those who felt this was a missed opportunity. The environment secretary, Steve Reed, took nationalisation out of the scope of the review from the outset, and also told Cunliffe not to consider more radical approaches such as turning companies into not-for-profits. This despite the fact that it is the mismanagement of water companies as much as the dumping of sewage that has enraged the public. So what of the idea that polluters – the upstream companies that generate some of the worst pollutants in our waterways such as wet wipes and Pfas – should pay? 'One of the best ways to deal with stuff not going into our rivers is not to let it into the sewers in the first place,' Cunliffe said, 'Why do we need wet wipes?' 'I have some sympathy for the water companies,' he said, 'because the drinking water system is closed and no one can touch it unless authorised to do so. The wastewater system is open. Anybody can put anything down the loo, and then at the treatment works, I've seen literally huge machines taking wet wipe mountains out of the sewage system.' Water companies claim that wet wipes, which shed microplastic particles and also build up into major blockages, are the main cause of sewage pollution. John Penicud, Southern Water's managing director for wastewater, said recently that 'the majority of wastewater pollutions are caused by wet wipes, fats, oils and grease being flushed down toilets and sinks', and called for wet wipes to be banned. The EU is introducing quaternary treatment, a more advanced method than that used in the UK. This has powerful filters that remove these trace chemicals from the water supply, but is expensive, so the bloc is looking at making the producers of these chemicals pay a levy that would then be used to create these treatment plants. Producers would be required to cover at least 80% of the costs associated with the sewage treatment upgrades necessary for removing these substances from wastewater. Cunliffe thinks the UK could look at adopting a similar approach for wet wipes; as a side-effect this would make plastic wet wipes more expensive, which would discourage their use. His report has recommended looking at adopting the EU laws in the UK, and investigating the prevalence and impact of these micropollutants in the environment and on human health. This way, he says, 'it's not the water bill payer who pays to take it out, but the people who make and buy the products … Pfas and so on will require quaternary treatment, and there are currently three levels of sewage treatment. To build another would be expensive.' The question, he said, was whether the user or the polluter paid. A Water UK spokesperson said: 'Removing Pfas 'forever chemicals' and other micropollutants from the water environment is a huge challenge because current sewage technology was never designed to deal with them. We need a national plan from government for upgrading sewage treatment that is paid for by chemical manufacturers instead of water bill payers, as well as a ban on Pfas products that will otherwise keep making the problem worse.'
