Tag Archives: biomass

BOOMTERRAGATE: MORE STINKS IN AVONMOUTH!

1 Reply

From our Avonmouth correspondent

For once it’s not a product from one of either Boomeco, Churngold, New Earth Solutions or Wessex Water’s latest ventures with the Evading Agency that’s creating A STINK down in Avonmouth but it might be closely connected.

It would seem that our old friend Councillor WAYNE “DEE” HARVEY, protector of the faithful and lickspittle to ‘the boys in the boardroom’ at his other employers the BRISTOL PORT COMPANY, might have misinformed the public about his involvement in the recent VICTORY by Avonmouth residents who stopped the Nexterra biomass plant from getting planning permission.

Even local MP “CHARDONNAY” CHARLOTTE LESLEY congratulated Wayne for his spandex stretching heroics in apparently forcing planning supremo “KING PRAWN” CALABRESE to stop dealing with this matter under his self-awarded delegated powers. And knowing Chardonnay’s penchant for bandwagons and publicity, we applaud her selflessness in standing slightly out of the limelight to allow Wayne some much needed glory before he blunders toward his next POLITICAL DISASTER.

Admittedly Chardonnay had been crowing about her own efforts to get permanent air quality measurements in place at Avonmouth and her success in getting some form of analysis for “another year”. So she probably thought she could chuck a bone to Wayne before he commits POLITICAL SUICIDE the next time someone lets him out to play unsupervised.

Residents understand that BCC will only be extending the monitoring for NINE MONTHS at ONE site yet to be identified. And after listening to the woeful air quality study put forward by BCC’s in-house ‘air quality expert’ at the Nexterra planning meeting, residents expect this study to be handled with the same forensic, laser-like focus as the current one.

We therefore anticipate the project will run thus; FUCK it up, COVER it up and SHUT UP about it.

However, unfortunately for Wayne, as the chair of Planning Committee ALEX “DEAD” WOODMAN indicated before a packed Council House last Wednesday night, his claims are, er … utter bollocks! Tweedle Dee had NOTHING to do with getting this application before a planning committee as the time for a councillor to do this had lapsed. The plans were called in by a council officer, possibly ‘KING PRAWN’ although we await clarification about that.

BCC are truly amazing in their depth of knowledge though aren’t they? The peasants of Avonmouth should feel privileged we have the gigantic minds of people like DR MARK “NOT QUITE” WRIGHT (what’s he a doctor of? Ginger beards?). He told the planning meeting that wood dust was fine because his experience of constructing flat pack furniture that weekend after a week designing an incomprehensible IT strategy for the abysmal telephony and data management systems in place at BCC, indicated that BACON, yes BACON, was far more carcinogenic than the tonnes of unsuppressed dust settling on any unfortunate Avnomouthonian daring to eat a butty between zero hour contracts.

To be fair, another Councillor did point out that you have a choice about eating bacon, which might skew DR NOT QUITE‘s expert analysis of respiratory cancer anomalies and the huge variance from the national average of heart attacks and strokes in in non meat eating and non-christian or multi-faith but no-bacon-thank-you Avonmouthians in the coming decades. Until then, we suggest he can sod off and stop belittling the absolute nightmare his policies are causing far from his own leafy ward.

Outstanding questions that need to be asked around this bizarre planning application episode include:

    • Why did Councillor Wayne “Dee” Harvey claim to have intervened in a planning process which he had previously endorsed despite multiple objections from residents? In fact neither Wayne, the local MP nor the other Councillor Matt ‘Dumb’ Melias objected to the application in the first place despite strong objections by residents. This begs the question of whose interests they actually serve if not the residents of the ward?
    • Was the original attempt to rubberstamp the application through delegated powers legal or lawful? As we understand it, the application should have by its content and impact on the community been put before a planning committee for scrutiny and not been considered under delegated powers in the first place. We await BCC’s response about the ‘extra training’ or other such outcome from their investigation into ‘King Prawn’s’ professional conduct as a public servant in this matter.
    • Why have the Bristol Evening Post not printed a retraction of their story despite their own reporter being present at ‘Boomterragate’ last Wednesday evening and witnessing the exchange with her own eyes? A serving Councillor seemingly misinformed the public via a newspaper article. This was clarified via a formal question by a member of the public to the chair in the public chamber. The public record needs to be corrected. It would be nice if the Post could devote the same size content and position within the paper to allow Wayne to clarify his position but we’ll settle for two sentences sandwiched between Gimp costume suppliers in the small ads if that’ll help. A conversation with one of the reporters at the Post promises to bear fruit so we’ll give them the benefit for the meantime.
    • Is the appointment of an employee of the Port, as a non-executive director looking after BCC’s (and therefore residents) interests ethical or legal? Doesn’t the Councillor have a massive conflict of interest? Another recent incumbent non-executive director also had some interesting business connections and held positions of public office whilst presiding over the introduction and development of the wood chipping industry that sprang up at the Port during her tenure. An industry with such stellar names as Boomeco, Churngold, Stobarts Biomass, EGNI International, A&A Recycling and AW Jenkinson forest products. An industry that was prised tooth and claw from their positions of near immunity granted by the Evading Agency and BCC pollution control staff. Regulators who seem more interested in killing off fledgling businesses on the other side of the city with actions that could be construed as malfeasance in public office, rather than taking on multi-million pound industry players to protect the health and wellbeing of the public they are paid handsomely to serve.

Planning law seems to be a hot topic in CHERNOBYL, sorry Avonmouth at present. It has now emerged that Councillor Dee Harvey’s latest PET PROJECT to shore up his woeful performance in building community spirit after the civil unrest in the summer may be going off piste at an alarming rate.

It seems that Tweedle Dee has neglected to consult with the community he apparently serves and has decided that he will personally ensure that Avonmouth is put firmly on the map, well Google Earth at least ,with a MASSIVE XMAS TREE parachuted into an Avonmouth park probably by Chinook at 3am.

We understand that this Avonmouth Park, or the ENCHANTED WOOD as it shall be known going forward, will require a hard standing and electrical supply to be installed to support the illuminated tower of power Councillor Harvey has helped to secure via an anonymous benefactor from the Port.

However, it seems this development hasn’t been near the planning department and no public consultation has taken place as far as we can ascertain. Given the short space of time before the event is scheduled one wonders if ‘King Prawn’ will be called upon to grease the wheels of government after his recent successes with power stations and highly toxic ash storage within meters of residential homes,

We’ll have to wait and see. BCC officer APRIL RICHMOND of some local partnership quango or other indicated that because ‘it would be hidden’ in some sort of Tracey Island kind of way, the advice she had been given was no planning application or lawful process needed to be served; we can only hope the advice didn’t come from ‘DR DEATH’ MARK WRIGHT after a weekend building a shed.

Although, if they’re wrong, it sends out a very poor message indeed if the city’s planning authority doesn’t see the need to bother getting planning permission.

On a positive note for the west country, Swindon got twinned with Disney, Avonmouth gets BHOPAL.

Anyway, time to sign off from Avonmouth as I need to decontaminate my kids before bed.

REMEMBER, REMEMBER 5 NOVEMBER BIOMASS, PLANNING AND LIES

1 Reply

AVONMOUTH NEEDS YOU ON THE FRONT LINE

Avonmouth councillors will be at the local NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM. We want to challenge them over there over their continued failure to represent the best interests of the residents of Avonmouth and their support of the building of the Biomass incinerator.

Venue: Avonmouth Community Centre
Time: 6.30pm

On Wednesday we need further support at Shitty Hall which is when the planning application will be heard to approve the incinerator. Lets make sure we make it a 5 November to remember!

Lets give ’em one hell of a firework display!

Photocall on the Green: 5.15 -5.30
Main Event: 6.00pm

THE KING PRAWN CALABRESE IS OFF: MORE DODGY CONDUCT FROM COUNCIL PLANNER

Leave a reply

king prawnMore dodgy conduct from Bristol’s dodgiest planning officer, ANGELO “KING PRAWN” CALABRESE.

Having tried and failed to award corporates NEXTERRA and BALFOUR BEATTY planning permission for a biomass plant in Avonmouth under DELEGATED POWERS he didn’t have and then, just days later, apparently ‘losing’ all the paperwork relating to the episode, King Prawn’s now trying to RIG the information going to councillors on the planning committee considering the application.

Over the last few days, 56 Avonmouth residents have signed and dated LETTERS on paper objecting to the plant and delivered them to the council. This brings the number of objections from Avonmouth residents to well OVER 100 in the space of just TEN DAYS.

Meanwhile, the only letter vaguely in favour comes from Tory councillor and Port of Bristol employee WAYNE “DEE” HARVEY.

Entirely coincidentally – and despite it being a GLARING OMISSION in the King Prawn’s planning report – between 50- 90 per cent of the wood for the biomass plant is likely to be IMPORTED for a fat fee through the, er, port!

However, in a crude attempt to REDUCE the number of formal objection letters from residents, King Prawn has listed these 56 letters as a PETITION! Conveniently reducing the number of objections by around 30 – 40 per cent!

One local resident told The BRISTOLIAN, “I hope Calabrese understands that many of us here in Avonmouth are taking his conduct personally. He has utter contempt for us and has shown us nothing but disrespect and proved he doesn’t give a toss about Avonmouth residents, our families or our health.

“He cares about big corporations making big money off our backs. If planning permission for this cancerous death plant is passed on the basis of the false and misleading information he has supported and rubberstamped throughout this process, he can rest assured we will be holding him personally accountable.

“You can’t lie, cheat, hoodwink and mislead a whole community in Bristol without consequences.”

Please – someone – can’t you put everyone out of their misery here and just fire this revolting little corporate shill as a matter of urgency?

AVONMOUTH BIO-MESS: IT’S A KNOCKOUT!

1 Reply

sugar_ray_leonad_I495-530x317

It isn’t, actually. But it’s a solid win on points!

News comes in that the Balfour Beatty/Nexterra BIOMASS POISON PLANT planning application for Avonmouth will now be going to a planning committee after all, rather than being decided behind closed doors by unaccountable planning bosses. This proves – yet again-  that corporate-friendly city council management wankers like ANGELO “KING PRAWN” CALABRESI and BARRA MAC“ NUGGET” RUAIRI don’t like it up ‘em.

Avonmouth Tory Councillor, WAYNE “DUM” HARVEY today stepped into the planning row and agreed to “call-in” the controversial application so that it will be decided by a committee of councillors as the council’s constitution clearly requires rather than by the dodgy duo.

This is a very messily executed 180 degree U-TURN by Harvey.  He originally accepted King Prawn Calabresi and MacNugget’s bullshit corporate-friendly “advice” and did not demand the application be heard by a planning committee when he had the opportunity to request this during the official ‘call-in’ period. Now the councillor has been forced to act very late – on the actual day his planning bosses’ decision was due in fact!

But why the last minute change of plan? Was it that overwhelming STENCH OF CORRUPTION emanating out of every pore of King Prawn and MacNugget’s inexplicable corporate-friendly decision? Or was it the PRICEY JUDICIAL REVIEW that would inevitably follow any secret management decision to approve planning permission for the poison plant, which would then have delayed their CORPORATE FRIENDS’ development for about a year and cost us council tax payers a packet?

Who knows? But we’ll chalk it down as a small victory. And watch out KING PRAWN and MACNUGGET … We’ve got your cards well and truly marked now you little pair of shits. And yes, it’s personal. If you wanna trash our communities then we’re gonna trash you.

Seconds out, round two …

ARE COUNCIL BOSSES BARRA MAC RUAIRI AND ANGELO CALABRESI BENT?

Leave a reply

bribes

Senior Bristol City Council planning officer ANGELO “KING PRAWN” CALABRESI along with his boss, head of planning and place, BARRA MAC “NUGGET” RUAIRI have decided that planning permission for a 10MW BIOMASS INCINERATOR in Avonmouth can be decided by themselves, behind closed doors, on Tuesday.

How have they reached this bizarre anti-democratic decision not to put this application in front of a planning committee? Their written guidance clearly states:

(a) Delegated officers must refer matters to the relevant committee as
they consider appropriate having regard to the following factors:-

i) whether the matter would have such an effect on communities, businesses or individuals such as the matter ought to be considered/determined by councillors;

How can anyone seriously believe burning 60,000 tonnes of waste wood a year near a residential area will not have an effect on “communities, businesses or individuals”?

Their decision is perverse. Moreover, why have they not attempted to publicise this application to the community? And why haven’t they displayed notices at or near the proposed site as required by law?

There’s two reasonable explanations for the pair’s conduct:

1. They’re thick and incompetent and simply do not have the basic reading and comprehension skills required to do the jobs they’re handsomely paid to do.

2. They’re bent and in the pockets of biomass corporations.

While there’s considerable circumstantial evidence – judging by his lack of performance in post over his nine months in Bristol – that BARRA MAC “NUGGET” RUAIRI is a posh, thick incompetent who ain’t up to the job, we also think other avenues need to be explored.

We therefore believe that Bristol City Council needs to start an immediate investigation into this pair for potential breaches of THE BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION ACT.

We also think the city council should inform the police with a view to having the pair’s bank accounts searched for any unusual payments.

Can’t do any harm can it?

THEY ARE SHAFTING AVONMOUTH ON TUESDAY

3 Replies

nbbing_header1

On Tuesday October 21 October, Bristol City Council planning officer, ANGELO CALABRESI will rubber stamp under delegated powers a planning application for Balfour Beatty and Nexterra Systems Corp (NXT) to build a 10MW wood burning (BIOMASS) incinerator opposite the old Phil Black Site.

This means that this application WILL NOT even go before a planning committee. Only councillors can now call this decision in to put before a planning committee.

Lib Dem councillor in Lawrence Weston, TIM LEAMAN, has been seeking the assistance of Avonmouth councillors Wayne “DEE” Harvey and Matthew “DUM” Melias. And guess what? They’re dragging their heels.

An Avonmouth resident said, “we need to make the summer protests look like a garden party. Once again we need to wake up the people who think it’s ok to play RUSSIAN ROULETTE with our health and wellbeing and that of future generations.”

The planning application is here. And you can make a comment here. Reasons to oppose the plant include:

·      Carcinogenic dust hazard

The plant is stated to burn 60,000 tonnes per annum of waste wood. Boomeco, with whom this plant is stated to operate, at present exports about half this figure from Avonmouth docks.  The dust created by the stacking and loading of this current quantity of waste wood already causes significant nuisance and health hazards in Avonmouth. These have already been widely reported in the Press. Wood dust is classified by the World Health Orginisation as a grade 1 carcinogen (causing cancer of the nasal passages.) The proposed handling of double the quantities of wood would continue in the open air, causing a serious, possibly illegal, health hazard.

·      Toxic Wood Fuel

The Atkins EIA states (3.2) that the waste wood will not include Grade D waste categorized as hazardous waste and including all grades of wood including treated material such as fencing.  Anybody who has visited Days Road or the other Council domestic wood waste reclamation sites – which will provide the fuel – can see that decking, fencing, lead-painted wood etc. containing heavy metals is a standard component.  This is not separated out and thus will be included in the fuel. If burnt, these toxic materials will pass through to the ash and flue emissions of the plant. As PM2.5s and nano-particles they can disperse poison over the whole city.

·      Source of Fuel too dispersed

This will be trucked from as far afield as Oxford, Wiltshire and Hereford. Wood has a low specific energy content as a fuel – it is bulky for the amount of heat delivered – So transport emissions of greenhouse gases will be high.

·      Competition for waste wood Fuel

The Mayor of Bristol has proposed local district heating schemes using waste biomass as fuel. These would compete with Boomeco for the fuel. Other waste-wood plants are proposed and the source of supply may be threatened.

·      Greenhouse gas consequences of inadequate supply of waste wood.

Throughout the UK waste-wood power-plants are being built and it is almost certain that the supply of waste wood will not be sufficient to guarantee long-term availability of this fuel source.  The companies will be using the fall-back position that they can always import wood pellets/chips. Experience (eg. Drax power station) shows that this wood is likely to come from clear felling old-growth forests in the USA, or plantations that have displaced old-growth forests. DECC have stated that they expect 80 per cent of biomass to be burnt in the UK for power generation will have to be imported. DECC have published figures to show that this fuel is WORSE for greenhouse gas emissions than the current fossil fuel mix for electricity generation. http://www.foe.co.uk/blog/blind-carbon-burning

The sustainability of the fuel source IS  a ‘material consideration’ for planning purposes.

·      Alternative re-use of waste wood

Wood is a valuable resource. The Bristol Wood Recycling Project state that 25% of scrap wood can be reused. Waste wood can also be used for making chip and particle board. A technology that sees it only as fuel to burn, is an outdated technology that has no place alongside the ambition of Bristol as Green Capital 2015.

·      Fire Hazard

The 2012 fire at Tilbury power station in the wood pellet store – which took three days to bring under control and destroyed the storage facility – shows the dangerous nature of storing wood chips/pellets. There are no plans to handle the fuel under an inert atmosphere.

 ·      Dangerous Wood Dust disposal

The plant will not accept ‘fines’ from Boomeco. This is the wood dust which must be removed before the fuel is burnt. This is an explosive and carcinogenic substance. There are no details of how and where the fines will be disposed of by Boomeco.

·      Toxic Ash disposal

The ash will contain heavy metals and other toxic substances from the waste wood burnt. There are no details of how and where this will be disposed of.

·      The plant is in a flood zone

What precautions will be taken to stop wood fuel, toxic ash etc. from being scattered by a flood?

·      Impact on Natura 2000 classified Severn Estuary wildlife refuge.

No figures are supplied modelling the deposition of nitrogen. The deposition already exceeds permitted levels on the reserve, which is less than a kilometre from the site. If the potential impact of the pollutants directly attributable to the installation exceeds 1% of the permitted level, the effect of background concentration, and also the potential effect of all other planned facilities that could contribute the same pollutants, must be assessed. This has not been done.  Atkins admit (8.6.1.3)

‘there may be indirect impacts on the ecology and wildlife of the estuary’

·     Untried technology.

The company behind this application, Nexterra, and the process they use, have been beset with serious problems, which go far beyond those of ‘conventional’ biomass plants.  Recently, Nexterra were forced to close a similarly designed plant in Tennessee because within less than 18 months, the weak acids in the woodgas had corroded key components.  Luckily it got shut down without a serious incident. Whereas their similar plant at the University of South Carolina exploded.  Which is not an unusual record for this technology.

http://ubyssey.ca/features/ubc-biomass432/

AVONMOUTH: HOYTY TOYTY IN TURD SHOCKER

Leave a reply

avonmouth protest

A brief soundbite from our on-the-spot interview at the Avonmouth protest today :

Protestor: It’s about George Ferguson not fulfilling his promises, its about the Deputy Mayor not fulfilling his promises, its about capitalism…..

Bristolian: That’s Gus Hoyt isn’t it?

Protestor: Gus Hoyt, yeah…

Bristolian: He’s a Green isn’t he, or something?

Protestor: Well he’s a turd mate really to be quite frank.

Quality!

A READER WRITES: COLIN COLEMAN ON THE POLLUTION OF AVONMOUTH

4 Replies

A reader’s impassioned plea for a cleaner Avonmouth where development benefits local residents:

Avonmouth is the DUMPING GROUND OF BRISTOL. Historically Imperial Smelting, Bristol Chemicals, Fisons, Rodia, ICI, Carbon Black and many other chemical companies have come and polluted the area with lead, sulphur and other dangerous chemicals. We had to have sirens – like the air raid sirens from the Second World War – installed to warn us to keep our windows closed. They have all been and gone now.

Now our little village is inundated with the stench that emanates from the sewage works. We have more ‘Waste Recycling Plants’ dotted around Avonmouth than is healthy. We have food waste composting plants, where the contents of all of Bristol’s little brown bins end up (together with all the fly larvae), and rubbish compacting plants that serve most if not all of Bristol. And now we have to suffer ‘biomass’ that is going to make the fly invasion even worse.

I blame Mr Ferguson and the whole of the Bristol Council. It is they that give planning permission to allow companies to operate and pollute people who live in the locality. Over the years they have tried to kill the area with chemical waste. Now we have to live like people in third world countries, with the stench of raw sewage. Blankets of dust covering the area. Explosions rattling the windows and then inundated with plagues of flies. We all pay Council Tax in and around Avonmouth, the same as the rest of the Bristol Area. WHAT DO WE GET BACK for that money?

I firmly believe it is about time the people of Avonmouth took Bristol City Council to task and asked why so many waste, recycling and biomass companies have been allowed to set up so close to habitation, and what is being done by those companies to control effluent and contamination of the local area.

On Mr Ferguson’s sale of Bristol Port: I Wonder what the value of the land is as industrial development land? I believe it is not only Bristol Port that is up for sale but also Portbury Dock. If you were to buy the equivalent amount of land to set up a port, how much would it cost? The Port Company are rightly developing the land so it makes them a good profit – but this also increases traffic servicing this growth, plus all the development that is happening in the area, like all the new warehouses and distribution centres. WHAT IS BEING DONE about all the increased heavy haulage as far as roads and increased air pollution from exhausts?

It is noted that although we have signs saying we have ‘uneven’ road surfaces as a result of heavy traffic and weather etc. Nothing seems to be being done to fix the problem.

I could carry on about all the things wrong with Avonmouth. The biggest plus for Avonmouth is the people that live here. We are a small village that has been overtaken by industry, but we are also a thriving community who care for each other, We have comparatively little crime and our children can play without being supervised all the time. We do have a lot to be grateful for because we do try and pull together. IT IS THE PEOPLE OF AVONMOUTH THAT MAKES IT A GOOD PLACE TO LIVE.

It seems the Council don’t want us to be happy together. If you don’t want to live in a third world village polluted by stench, dust, explosions, flies and everything else they can throw at us, then complain to the Environment Agency, Bristol City Council, George Ferguson, your local Member of Parliament (Lying Brigade) and the local councillors who are supposed to have your best interests at heart (if they have one).

Bristol City Council is profiting from the increased revenue from the increased development in the area – so why don’t the spend some of it trying to make the people of Avonmouth’s lives a little better? We are surrounded by industry yet pay standard Council Tax with no deduction for the pollution we have to endure. Industry around us has no thought for its close neighbours. They may employ some people from Avonmouth, but only because they enhance the companies profitability.

By Colin Coleman (Avonmouth Resident)