Southampton Biomass Power Station

[jawillwill]

Looks like it's going to be pretty big. Anyone here going to be living close to it? Thoughts? Good or a bad thing?

 

Links for if you don't know anything about it...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-17955109

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-17992480

 

Will you vote on it? Or is there any point?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-18783814

[Golden Balls]

Not near me but that looks terrible

[toofarnorth]

The picture showing the street with the power station is slightly misleading. That was one of the initial designs, but it has since been scaled down dramatically.

 

I think the original design was meant to scare the local population so when the new designs were released people would just be so relieved it wasn't so bug anymore they wouldn't object.

[pap]

A really good idea and really stupid idea all at the same time.

 

Would like to see more sources of energy, but that is a bloody mental location. Why not just build it out of the way?

[Lighthouse]

Couldn't we just burn Millbrook instead?

[stev2001]

A really good idea and really stupid idea all at the same time.

 

Would like to see more sources of energy, but that is a bloody mental location. Why not just build it out of the way?

 

Needs to be next to the water for wood supply I believe. Hope it doesn't stink?

[Mattio]

Surely it would make more sense to build it over where Fawley is ?

[Smirking_Saint]

Everyone wants electric but nobody wants to see any of it

[jawillwill]

A really good idea and really stupid idea all at the same time.

 

Would like to see more sources of energy, but that is a bloody mental location. Why not just build it out of the way?

 

Where do you think is out of the way? It's pretty much always going to be close to someone. Would you prefer if it was bang in the middle of the New Forest or something instead?

 

I agree about the need for more sources of energy, but in the long run, an increased reliance on Biomass simply cannot work.

[TopGun]

Where do you think is out of the way? It's pretty much always going to be close to someone. Would you prefer if it was bang in the middle of the New Forest or something instead?

 

I agree about the need for more sources of energy, but in the long run, an increased reliance on Biomass simply cannot work.

 

This is my direct field of work. I have been involved with successful planning permission of a number of biomass plants, efw plants, CCGTs and wind farms. In terms of biomass plants I have helped two 300MW plants to get planning consent.

 

Biomass will be an important contributor to a balanced energy portfolio which is what the country needs in terms of both the climate change programme and energy security policies.

 

Modern biomass plants are not noisy, do not smell and have advanced filtering and abatement systems that eliminate most of the NOx, SO2, particulate matter and dioxins. However, that is never believed by local campaigners who use voodoo science to whip up fear of cancer, birth defects, COPD and pretty much any other illness or disease that they can think of.

 

The main issue with any modern power plant is likely to be visual impact. The revised Helius plans are better than the first set. But that is the point of public consultation also. It should be remembered that the proposed venue is a dock also, so is earmarked for industrial type activities. I haven't looked at all the Helius plans but I would assume they are thinking of supplying biomass to the plant by ship, thus keeping additional lorries off the roads.

[buctootim]

I agree about the need for more sources of energy, but in the long run, an increased reliance on Biomass simply cannot work.

 

Why not? Its never going to make up a huge part of the electricity generation portfolio but there is plenty of waste wood which would otherwise be composted or landfilled.

[derry]

No, put it beside either of the existing power stations at Fawley or Marchwood.

[buctootim]

The main issue with any modern power plant is likely to be visual impact.

 

People can grow to love them and consider them as local landmarks. When Brighton B power station closed down they left the chimney standing - and years later when it was to be demolished to make way for a new power station on the site (Shoreham) the main compalint was that the tower wasnt as tall - though know people seem to like the new stainless steel instead of old brick.

[TopGun]

People can grow to love them and consider them as local landmarks. When Brighton B power station closed down they left the chimney standing - and years later when it was to be demolished to make way for a new power station on the site (Shoreham) the main compalint was that the tower wasnt as tall - though know people seem to like the new stainless steel instead of old brick.

 

I don't disagree but that will not be accepted by the antis who fall into two camps always:

 

A) Straight up NIMBYs who want electricity but don't want a power plant nearby, mainly because of concern about house prices

B) Those who have no real understanding but gain a fearful perception of the plant and its potential detriment to public health and air quality - effectively those who are willfully misled by category A ringleaders quoting voodoo science.

Edited 17 July, 2012 by TopGun

[buctootim]

No, put it beside either of the existing power stations at Fawley or Marchwood.

 

Classic nimbyism. I want electricity but other people should have three power stations whilst I have none.

[derry]

Classic nimbyism. I want electricity but other people should have three power stations whilst I have none.

 

NMBY I don't live near any of them. I think the existing power stations are the place to put them. A bit of a monstrosity at the bottom of Foundry Lane. I do think we should dump so called green taxes unless they are ring fenced not just grabbed by the treasury.

[pap]

Where do you think is out of the way? It's pretty much always going to be close to someone. Would you prefer if it was bang in the middle of the New Forest or something instead?

 

I agree about the need for more sources of energy, but in the long run, an increased reliance on Biomass simply cannot work.

 

The other side of the Test is already massively industrialised in certain places, so why not around there?

 

It's not just a NIMBY reason - it's a potential public health issue. There are some bloody good reasons for keeping industry and power stations away from urban areas.

[jawillwill]

This is my direct field of work. I have been involved with successful planning permission of a number of biomass plants, efw plants, CCGTs and wind farms. In terms of biomass plants I have helped two 300MW plants to get planning consent.

 

Biomass will be an important contributor to a balanced energy portfolio which is what the country needs in terms of both the climate change programme and energy security policies.

 

Modern biomass plants are not noisy, do not smell and have advanced filtering and abatement systems that eliminate most of the NOx, SO2, particulate matter and dioxins. However, that is never believed by local campaigners who use voodoo science to whip up fear of cancer, birth defects, COPD and pretty much any other illness or disease that they can think of.

 

The main issue with any modern power plant is likely to be visual impact. The revised Helius plans are better than the first set. But that is the point of public consultation also. It should be remembered that the proposed venue is a dock also, so is earmarked for industrial type activities. I haven't looked at all the Helius plans but I would assume they are thinking of supplying biomass to the plant by ship, thus keeping additional lorries off the roads.

 

My understanding is that the biomass will be sourced locally where possible, but mainly from ships (i.e. causing a slight increase in traffic), although it will primarily come from abroad (I've heard Canada/Brazil/Norway).

 

The second plans are better than the first, but they appear quite superficial changes, and getting people to vote on which design they prefer probably isn't what the locals want. From what I've heard, the locals have other genuine concerns around the proposals besides visual impact - whether that's to disguise NIMBY attitudes or not, I don't know. Even if they are NIMBYs though, I don't think that should discredit their opinions entirely - surely the fact that quite a few houses could significantly decrease in value as a direct result of the plant etc., should be a serious consideration?

Maybe campaigners don't help themselves by exaggerating their environmental/health concerns, but I believe that they are grounded in genuine concerns and should perhaps have more say in the process, no? That's not a criticism of Helius per se, more at the way development processes in the country work.

 

What do you actually do TopGun? Do you work for a developer or are you an environmental consultant or something?

[TopGun]

My understanding is that the biomass will be sourced locally where possible, but mainly from ships (i.e. causing a slight increase in traffic), although it will primarily come from abroad (I've heard Canada/Brazil/Norway).

 

The second plans are better than the first, but they appear quite superficial changes, and getting people to vote on which design they prefer probably isn't what the locals want. From what I've heard, the locals have other genuine concerns around the proposals besides visual impact - whether that's to disguise NIMBY attitudes or not, I don't know. Even if they are NIMBYs though, I don't think that should discredit their opinions entirely - surely the fact that quite a few houses could significantly decrease in value as a direct result of the plant etc., should be a serious consideration?

Maybe campaigners don't help themselves by exaggerating their environmental/health concerns, but I believe that they are grounded in genuine concerns and should perhaps have more say in the process, no? That's not a criticism of Helius per se, more at the way development processes in the country work.

 

What do you actually do TopGun? Do you work for a developer or are you an environmental consultant or something?

 

Stakeholder engagement / pre-application consultation / developer PR / lobbyist etc.

[TopGun]

 

It's not just a NIMBY reason - it's a potential public health issue. There are some bloody good reasons for keeping industry and power stations away from urban areas.

 

There aren't actually unless you listen to those peddling voodoo science.

 

 

Here's the up to date advice of the Health Protection Agency:

 

While it is not possible to rule out adverse health effects from modern, well regulated municipal waste incinerators with complete certainty, any potential damage to the health of those living close-by is likely to be very small, if detectable. This view is based on detailed assessments of the effects of air pollutants on health and on the fact that modern and well managed municipal waste incinerators make only a very small contribution to local concentrations of air pollutants.

[Braunton Saint]

There aren't actually unless you listen to those peddling voodoo science.

 

 

Here's the up to date advice of the Health Protection Agency:

 

While it is not possible to rule out adverse health effects from modern, well regulated municipal waste incinerators with complete certainty, any potential damage to the health of those living close-by is likely to be very small, if detectable. This view is based on detailed assessments of the effects of air pollutants on health and on the fact that modern and well managed municipal waste incinerators make only a very small contribution to local concentrations of air pollutants.

 

 

Possibly campaigners are just as guilty of cherry picking scientific argument as some developers are of selecting factual statements to suit their vested interests? Is it not understandable that local people are going to be slightly concerned about this enormous incinerator within such close proximity to an area of concentrated urban population?

 

I grew up in Freemantle and I still have a lot of mates and family there. I know there is significant concern at this proposal which to some extent stems from the developers ineptitude at communicating with the public who will be affected greatest by the power station.

 

I believe that Fawley is shortly to be decommissioned, is there a technical reason why it could not simply be re boilered to burn bio mass saving all this hassle and probably a lot of cash?