Centrica officially registers application to build Barrow biomass plant
Last updated at 08:21, Friday, 06 July 2012
CAMPAIGNERS against a proposed biomass plant have vowed that “the fight starts now” after the planning application was formally submitted.
Centrica confirmed it has lodged the application with the national Planning Inspectorate.
Campaign group Furness Opposes Biomass now has more than 13,000 signatures on a petition against the plant, and is due to present it to Downing Street on Thursday.
Spokesman Scott Symon, of Liddle Close, Barrow, said: “I thought Centrica would have listened to what the people were trying to tell them. We did have a promise off them they wouldn’t impose it against the will of the people.
“We are going to have a meeting on Tuesday night to discuss the way forward.
“We are then going to hold roadshows as we want to inform people (who object) about their way forward, as we now want to put our objections forward to the Planning Inspectorate. The fight starts now for us.”
Fellow campaigner Dennis Yates, of Rampside Road, said: “I think it’s fairly clear that it’s not wanted. The traffic around here and the surrounding areas, through to Ulverston, is a major problem. It just seems totally in the wrong place.”
Conservative Barrow borough councillor, Ray Guselli, who is also opposed to the plan, said: “The most important thing now is that those opposed to the proposal understand this is the first step in Centrica’s long route through the planning process, which can be opposed.
Barrow and Furness MP John Woodcock had asked Centrica to withdraw its proposal to build the 80MW plant at Roosecote following a public debate in May, when the plans met united opposition from residents in attendance.
Mr Woodcock said: “I am disappointed Centrica are pressing ahead to the planning stage but conscious the company has yet to make a final decision – there is still time for them to listen to the views of local people.
“At a meeting on biomass in the House of Commons last week, I confronted energy minister Charles Hendry with the difficult truth that companies and the government are completely failing to win local acceptance for projects like this.”
The power station would create 500 jobs during construction, 50 once operational, and 20 at the docks.
Centrica says the existing Roose gas fired station is the oldest in the UK and is no longer economically viable.
The company wants to replace it with a biomass plant to provide a low-carbon, sustainable source of power.
A Centrica spokesman said: “Centrica has undertaken significant public consultation on its proposals to both inform residents and other interested parties on the plans, and to allow early views to be expressed.
“We have heard a full range of views – supportive and opposed.
“Our proposed biomass project is going through the consenting process – a necessary step that needs to be completed before we consider whether to invest and build this plant.
“No decision to construct this plant has yet been made; and, in the period between now and that decision point, we will continue to listen to, and reflect on, all of the representations that are made to us.”
First published at 08:08, Thursday, 05 July 2012
Published by http://www.nwemail.co.uk
Have your say
The thought of the Biomass plant being built in Barrow is a nightmare. It will have an unbelievable visual inpact locally but, equally as bad and perhaps under-appreciated is the impact that growing biomass fuel (willow) will have.Recently, we were travelling on a coach near Carlisle and Penrith when we came across fields of young trees so tall that they blocked out the views of the surrounding area. You could not see the beautiful scenery at all! This I discovered was Biopmass fuel. Bearing in mind that a large part of Cumbria depends on tourism for their survival this could only be very bad news for them if this plant goes ahead. You really have to see these things growing to appreciate the impact and one can only imagine what it would be like to live surrounded by these densedly planted and over-powering young trees. Tons and tons of them would be required to keep the plant going I am sure and anywhere where these trees were grown would find their landscape totally ruined. If it is not in our backyard it would be in somebody else's and heaven help them if it happens. They would find themselves oppressed by the visual impact and depressed by the diruption the harvesting and transportation of them to the Biomass plant would cause in rural areas! Lets hope common sense prevails!
Hi Peter,Absolutely agree people are entitled to their own opinions; it is called democracy. However, I am sorry that you feel I should not be allowed to participate in that process, correcting what others say, who also correct me. Democracy is a two way debate and process.Some people have resorted to calling those opposed to the Biomass Plant "idiots" and of "scaremongering". That does not make for wither sensible or meaningful debate.CS....I stand corrected, but disappointingly so. I really thought that education should provide a curriculum where spelling and grammar was at least a consideration. (However, it it's good enough for BAE, building world class nuclear submarines....then it has to be good enough for me...LOL!!!....Apologies if I underestimated your hidden skills) I agree entirely with you about some of the other issues in Barrow; not good and trying to do something about them.You make an assumption that hardly anyone notices the DDH; I presume that is based on evidence rather than supposition? The effect on the landscape of the proposed Biomass Plant is immense; even those supportive of the proposal have recognised that. However, I have to remain of the view that two wrongs do not make a right. I am NOT against nuclear power and have never said I was. I FULLY SUPPORT tidal and wave power and supported the Bridge across the Bay initiative. I TOTALLY SUPPORT underwater turbines and have never said otherwise. YOU ARE MAKING TOTALLY WRONG STATEMENTS AND SUPPOSITIONS.You state we cannot "realy" on BAE forever which I think is intended to mean that we cannot "rely" on BAE. I totally agree with you which is why I have been involved in trying to attract new business to Barrow as well as retaining existing businesses.I am sorry that we beg to differ over this issue. Those opposing Biomass are not anti everything; we just believe that there may be, as you have quite rightly highlighted, potentially better options. I would like to see all of the means of energy production that you have listed made better use of and fully explored. Perhaps even through inward investment and new businesses coming here to use the excellent skill base barrow enjoys.Hopefully, we at least agree on something!!!!
View all 34 comments on this article