In a report to be published later this week, the Ringaskiddy and District Residents' Association has outlined its opposition to the proposal to build Ireland's first toxic-waste incinerator at Ringaskiddy.
It says the community, which has been unfairly treated and "traumatised" by over industrialisation during the past three decades, has had enough.
The association is seen by Indaver, the Belgian-owned company seeking permission to build the incinerator, as the key group for it to win local approval for the project, but the 20-page report contains probably the most strident and focused anti-incinerator argument so far put forward.
In it, the association says it has battled for 30 years against a poor policing record of the local authorities which failed to ensure that industry did not pollute the Cork Harbour environment, and now that enforcement has at last been tightened up, the people of the area are being asked to accept a toxic-waste incinerator.
The unprecedented pace of industrialisation in Ringaskiddy fragmented the local community and frightened off newcomers because of fears for public health safety due to pollution. However, better environmental controls meant the population was rising again for the first time in years, a trend that would be brought to a halt, the report says, if the proposal was approved.
It further claims that the Ringaskiddy and Shanbally communities appear to have been abandoned by Cork County Council, whose development plan suggests that the area should be reserved for industrial purposes almost exclusively and that new housing should be curtailed.
Despite claims to the contrary by Indaver, the toxic effects of incineration pose a real danger to public health, the report says, adding that the company proposes to measure airborne pollutants in the environment, whereas a recent report suggested it would be more appropriate to carry out controlled studies on humans.
The report asks if any expert assurances on health concerns can be given to the local community and adds that if the project goes ahead independent and continuous health monitoring will have to be paid for by Indaver.
The unforeseen and rising volume of commercial traffic already using the area amounts to lack of foresight by the planning authorities, the report adds, and it stresses that 100 extra trucks each day would use the inadequate Ringaskiddy roads system if the incinerator was built.
At present values, it says, the level of State and commercial investment in Ringaskiddy, both land and port-related, is estimated at £1.5 billion.
"The transition from a rural and nautical community to an industry-dominated community has not come without trauma. The community has seen areas of prime farmland or coastal scenery altered and changed. Homes, farm houses and familiar or centuries-old landmarks have disappeared off the map with the help of bulldozer and dredger.
"Many areas have been altered out of recognition by factories, roads and jetties. Large tracts of fertile farmland are sterile land banks held in a form of limbo, awaiting an uncertain fate," the report says.
Within the past fortnight Indaver has hosted a visit to its plants in Belgium for a group of people from Carrigaline and Monkstown, but not Ringa skiddy itself, because the association has decided it does not want to visit Belgium or have any further contact with the company.
When Indaver first announced its plans some months ago, members of the association met Indaver officials, including Mr John Ahern, its general manager for Ireland.
"We told Mr Ahern that we weren't interested in having the incinerator in Ringaskiddy, now or ever. Our position has not changed. We are totally and absolutely opposed to this plant coming to our area. It should more properly be located in a remote midlands site where waste delivery could be made from all points in Ireland," Mr Kevin Barry, public relations officer for the association, said.
"Why should a small, local community which has already suffered more than its share now have to put up with the country's first toxic-waste incinerator and the arrival of waste from all parts of the country to feed it?"
According to Mr Ahern, the offer to bring members of the association to Belgium for a fact-finding visit still stands and the company is hopeful it will be taken up.
"We would love them to travel to our facilities in Belgium and see for themselves how our plants work and how they are received in the local communities. Hopefully, that visit will happen at some future date.
"We will be bringing another group from the harbour area to Belgium next month. I think when people see at first hand that the plants are run to very high standards they are pleasantly surprised," he added.
It is now expected that Indaver's planning application for the toxic and non-toxic incinerators which it hopes to build at Ringaskiddy will not be lodged with Cork County Council until next October. While planning permission is not automatic, the application will be accompanied by an environmental impact statement arguing in its favour, and the likelihood is that permission will be granted.
After that, a 30-day period will be allowed for appeals. Given the ground-breaking nature of the application, there will almost certainly be an oral hearing. Mr Ahern said Indaver's view was that in many ways such a hearing would be welcome because the company was more than willing to have the case for incineration scrutinised in public.
The residents' association feels that in making its county development plan, Cork County Council has ignored the village ethos which is as strong in its community and nearby Shanbally as it is anywhere else in rural Ireland.
It feels, too, that a cash-rich company such as Indaver has been attracted to Ireland only because of the opportunities created by the waste-management crisis. While there is nothing wrong with the profit motive, says Mr Barry, no single community should be asked to do more than its share for the public good.
Industry after industry has been diverted to Ringaskiddy where the IDA developed the largest industrial land bank in the State at great public expense. This was done, the residents claim, without any thought for how the small community would be affected.