Evening Standard, on UK Politics, 7 November 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Greens back £1.5bn Edmonton incinerator after warning there is ‘no better option’

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.1 finding

Green politicians who previously opposed the reconstruction of Edmonton’s controversial waste incinerator have insisted there is “no better option” than pressing ahead with the £1.5 billion project - in a dramatic shift of their position. Ahead of local elections, Green representatives across North London pledged to explore every possible route to halt the development. But after taking control of the North London Waste Authority, the party says it has inherited what it describes as a “poisoned chalice”.

In a statement, Green members said they remained instinctively opposed to burning rubbish but had concluded that abandoning the scheme would risk catastrophic financial consequences. “We have found that political mismanagement by the previous Labour-controlled board has left us with no better options,” they said. “It is simply between this or bankruptcy.” The project will replace the ageing Edmonton EcoPark incinerator, which has been operating since 1971 and serves around two million residents across Barnet, Camden, Enfield, Hackney, Haringey, Islington and Waltham Forest.

Campaigners have long opposed the development over environmental concerns, while supporters argue it is essential to ensuring the capital can safely process its waste. The reversal marks . NLWA chief Councillor Jacob Cable, a senior Hackney councillor, previously told MyLondon it was “clear” that scrapping the project would be “devastating both financially for the seven constituent boroughs”.

The construction of a new incinerator has been plagued by slow progress and the current burner, commissioned in 1971, will stay in use until 2030. Its replacement was initially intended to be up and running by 2027, until the project was hit by construction delays resulting from Brexit, the war in Ukraine and high interest rates. The scheme was approved in 2017 and work began in 2022. It has been met with heavy pushback from resident groups, such as Stop the Edmonton Incinerator Now (STEIN), who fear it could increase demand for waste and release harmful particles into the air.

The previous administration, headed by Waltham Forest’s Clyde Loakes, assured residents it would meet government standards and act as an “exemplar” for future projects. The energy-from-waste incineration plant will use the process of selective catalytic reduction – converting nitrogen oxide into water and diatomic nitrogen – and a combined dry/wet scrubber to capture particles. He said last year that scrapping the plans would be the “worst possible outcome” for more than two-million people.

He added that not completing the project would be “detrimental” to North Londoners and would deny them “a safe, clean and low-carbon solution for managing their waste”.

Read the original article on standard.co.uk (opens in a new tab)
What we found (1)

The Evening Standard reports that Green councillors now running the North London Waste Authority have dropped their opposition to the £1.5bn Edmonton incinerator, citing the cost of scrapping it. It attributes the Greens' blame of the previous Labour-run board to them, and it names the resident campaign against the plant and its concerns. The only problem is a superlative in its own voice, calling the U-turn one of the most striking in recent years with nothing in the article to back the comparison.

  1. Uses a loaded word

    Minor

    “one of the most striking shifts in position by Green politicians on a major London infrastructure project in recent years”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice the Standard ranks the Greens' change of position, "one of the most striking shifts", against other projects and years. It names no other case to compare it with.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes it as an established judgement that this reversal is unusually dramatic by the standard of recent London politics.
    The context
    The article shows a real reversal: a pre-election pledge to halt the scheme, then support once in control. It offers no comparison with any other Green position on any other project, so the ranking rests on nothing in the piece. The plain facts carry the story without the superlative.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“pledged to explore every possible route to halt the development”

    Show it in the article

What it gets right

  • ““We have found that political mismanagement by the previous Labour-controlled board has left us with no better options,” they said.”

    The Standard keeps the Greens' charge against the previous Labour board as their claim, in quotation marks and attributed, and does not adopt it in its own voice.

  • “Stop the Edmonton Incinerator Now (STEIN), who fear it could increase demand for waste and release harmful particles into the air”

    It names the resident campaign opposing the plant and states its specific concerns, rather than leaving opponents as unnamed campaigners.

  • “construction delays resulting from Brexit, the war in Ukraine and high interest rates”

    It gives concrete causes for the delay, so the reader can judge the project's slippage for themselves.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Evening Standard

  1. 7 NovBurnham vows specific support to help homeless veterans off the streets0.0
  2. 7 NovTerrorist Anjem Choudhury's right-hand man housed in three-bed north London council flat3.0
  3. 7 NovMigrant who launched 'fraudulent' £7m Home Office lawsuit caught go-karting3.0
  4. 7 NovAre cyclists finally getting the message on Oxford Street?3.0
  5. 7 NovAlastair Campbell: Is Andy Burnham the ‘persevilient’ Prime Minister Britain’s politics needs?0.0

Everything we scored from Evening Standard