The new Mrapp facebook wall is http://www.facebook.com/No.Incinerator the old MRAPP facebook group is at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=161435721245 Please join in at either or both... Michael Gallagher says he is putting the finishing touches to a new Scottish anti-incineration website (http://www.gainscotland.org.uk), and would like to put links to any campaign websites. From Herald 11 Dec. Another Anaerobic digestion plant planned for Cumbernauld taking in 60,000 tons of biomass waste. Surely Glasgow & Clyde valley are going to be well-catered for in the disposal of biomass? Green energy plans kept in the family ·
· Robert Etherson, left, and his father-in-law Graeme Waddell have kept plans for Scotland’s first major anaerobic digester quiet until recently. Mark Smith
Published on 11 Dec 2009 The conversation across the dining room table at the Paisley home of former Rolls Royce executive Graeme Waddell has been nothing if not exuberant over the past few years. Until recently, it has also been top secret. It was here, before umpteen stealth servings of roast beef, that Waddell and his son-in-law Robert Etherson – not to mention their respective families – hammered out the idea of launching a new company, Energen Biogas, and building Scotland’s first industrial-sized anaerobic digester, which will also be the biggest of its kind in the UK. At the same time, it was also an idea that provided the opportunity Etherson had been waiting for to return to his beloved west of Scotland and for Waddell to pass on his years of business expertise and experience to his family. The two men are now poised to become the greenest team in Scotland. In spite of its ominous-sounding name, an anaerobic digester is not a creature from a 1950s B-movie with an evil plan to gnash out of existence all human life on Planet Earth. On the contrary, anaerobic digestion is an Earth-saving process, by which plant and animal waste is digested in tanks by micro-organisms, which then release methane that can be used to provide heat and power, in other words, pure “green” energy. The process of anaerobic digestion is the breakdown of microorganisms into material that is biodegradable without oxygen. Originally the process was relatively expensive, requiring significant technical expertise, and there was little demand for its use except for industrial types of application. More recently, the process has been perfected and costs have been lowered considerably, enabling it to be seen as a viable source of alternative renewable energy. Producing renewable energy from biodegradable waste, which has gained the support of Friends of the Earth, helps tackle climate change, instead of contributing to it through landfilling and incineration. Behind every business idea is a story, and the bones of this one goes back to the dinner table in Paisley, where the idea was developed slowly and determinedly amid secret servings of Sunday lunch, heated conversation and impatient family members, who in the end begged the pair to just get on with it. Over soup and bread, beef and chicken, cakes and pies – all of which can be anaerobically digested – Waddell and Etherson thrashed out a plan to build an organic waste plant and electricity generator smack in the middle of central Scotland. And as industrial waste disposals and energy plants go, it would be the greenest of the green. The Herald met them in a restaurant in the centre of Glasgow recently, and while there was no roast beef, the topic of conversation had changed little. The pair were as fired up as ever about the idea of anaerobic digestion. The primary problem, however, was not the construction of this giant waste manager and power generator, or even raising the cash in the middle of a credit crunch. The big problem was how to keep an £8m facility in Cumbernauld, North Lanarkshire, where they intend to transform 60,000 tonnes of kitchen and farm waste each year into “green” electricity for 4,000 homes, a secret – even at the idea stage. Waddell, who at the time was still business director of Rolls Royce in East Kilbride, could not utter a word about the plan until he retired in August 2008. Etherson also had to keep mum until just a weeks ago. He was working as the chief executive of Arbroath-based Abbey Fruit, one of the UK’s leading fruit packers, and dared not tell his employers until he was sure of his next step. He had a family to support – three children and his wife, Jacqueline, Waddell’s eldest daughter. And so Waddell and Etherson became something more than in-laws. They became partners-in-law in a secret pact known only to themselves and their families. Waddell, who was with Rolls-Royce for 34 years, had business connections and the experience. He is also head of the west of Scotland regional advisory board of Scottish Enterprise, and his prime motivation – like any proud father and grandfather – was to help his family. “The idea came out of an original intention to open a glasshouse business, given Robert’s knowledge of the produce industry and his position with Abbey,” Waddell said. “Years ago, there were large glasshouse businesses throughout the Lanark valley, but the number of hours of sunlight here make it impossible to compete with places like Holland. “So then we began thinking about organic energy and we moved on to the idea of biomass and biofuels. We could see that energy prices were rising and that biomass was a huge growth area. We also knew it was something the Government was very keen to push forward.” Etherson added: “We basically Googled the word biomass and hit upon anaerobic digestion. This is a waste management and energy generation system that works like a big cow’s stomach and I realised there was a real opportunity here – for us and for Scotland.” Nonetheless, Etherson also had further motivations. “To start my own company has been a dream and an ambition since I was a wee boy,” he said. “But I also had this burning ambition to get back to the west of Scotland – ever since I was a teenager and left home.” Etherson, who is originally from Torrance, left for a Greek vacation when he was 19 and ended up getting a job with Thomson Holidays before moving to Italy, where he remained for eight years. He said: “I wanted to see a bit of the world then, but I always wanted to come back. “I regret that didn’t happen until after my dad died. I remember when I was at Glasgow Airport heading back to Italy and I suddenly had a panic attack. I knew that I couldn’t leave again. I knew that this was where I belonged.” He added: “I have to say that I’m delighted to be back in Glasgow. “When I was working with Abbey Fruits, we lived in Carnoustie and Graeme was in Paisley. “But it was out of those visits to Paisley that the idea for Energen came into being. We used to drive down every weekend and over the dinner table we worked out Energen together. “After we developed the idea, it was Graeme who went public first. “I couldn’t say a word because of my position with Abbey Fruits. In fact, it has only been a few weeks that I’ve been able to state my involvement in it. It has all been a big secret until recently.” In October, press reports emerged that Energen Biogas, which was awarded £2m by the Scottish Government towards the project, had joined forces with Buckinghamshire-based waste management giant Shanks to open the £8m facility in Cumbernauld. The reports implied that Shanks was the lead project developer. “We had to do it that way,” said Waddell. “Robert was still working with Abbey. In fact, his name could not even be associated with the project. “But in the past few weeks, circumstances have changed and we’re here today to say that it is a Scottish company that is behind the development and that we have big plans. “Shanks, in fact, have a 24.9% stake. But actually this whole thing is down to the entrepreneurship of two Scottish guys and, in fact, Robert will be the one running day-to-day business.” The Cumbernauld plant is scheduled to open in 2010 and Etherson and Waddell envisage opening another 10 throughout Scotland over the next five years. And what about those Sunday lunches? The best guess is that they will continue for years to come and any leftovers will end up being anaerobically digested and transformed into energy for the good people of Cumbernauld. Got the leaflet? We question Howie's choice of PR company by putting a link to the Times article http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article6788783.ece Don't forget to boycott Simon Howie Sausages in Tesco!! Stuart Douglas posted this on the eplanning web site - I'm sure that's Kris Keane's mate (who done a short talk at the Shawhead meeting on the door opening times for the proposed plant). From: Sent: 09 December 2009 18:28
BY POST AND E-MAIL
17 Fir Grove New Stevenston Motherwell ML1 4DP
Mr Colin Marshall Planning Department North Lanarkshire Council Kildonan Street Coatbridge ML5 3LN 9 December 2009
Dear Mr Marshall FURTHER COMMENTS IN RELATION TO APPLICATION - 09/00675/FUL I write to supplement my comments of objection of 24 September 2009 in regards the above Planning Application. Having read the various documents submitted by the applicant I feel there remains several inconsistencies within the application and in particular in relation to the proposed annual capacity of the plant. Table 1 of Appendix E.2 of Annex E to the Environmental Statement states that between Monday and Friday there is estimated to be 61 Waste Input Journeys per day and thus there will be a total of 305 such journeys in this period. Table 2 of Appendix E.2 states that there will be 40 Waste Input Journeys on Saturdays and Table 3 indicates that there will be no Waste Input Journeys on a Sunday. Therefore there will be a weekly total of 345 Waste Input Journeys and thus the annual figure will be 17 940 Waste Input Journeys every year. Paragraph 4.3.2 of Annex E of the Environmental Statement states that waste is most likely to arrive in Articulated lorries with a capacity of 20 tonnes plus. However that paragraph also states that it is estimated that 50% of waste will be delivered in smaller vehicles with a capacity of 8 tonnes. If we assume that 50% of waste will arrive in 20 tonne deliveries and 50% in 8 tonne deliveries then there will be 8970 twenty tonne deliveries annually and 8970 eight tonne deliveries annually. The 8970 twenty tonne deliveries would deliver a total of 179 400 tonnes of waste annually and the 8970 eight tonne deliveries would deliver 71 760 tonnes of waste annually. Therefore, based upon the figures within these reports, there would be a total of 251 160 tonnes of waste delivered to the plant annually. This figure is 91 160 tonnes greater than the 160 000 tonnes per annum capacity of the Materials Recovery and Fuel Preparation that is stated in paragraph 4.1.3 at page 7 of the Supporting Statement. Furthermore no where in the tables in Appendix E.2 is it made clear how many journeys importing the required Biofuel will occur each day. Paragraph 4.1.3 of the Supporting Statement states that 20 000 tonnes of Biofuel can be expected to be imported annually. Paragraph 4.3.2 of Annex E of the Environmental Statement states that this is most likely to be imported in 15 tonne deliveries. Thus annually we could expect 1334 deliveries of Biofuel. This would equate to 26 a week which would be 5 each working day. However the applicant does not make clear if this figure is included with the Waste Input Journeys indicated in the tables in Appendix E.2 or if this would be in addition to these figures. I also have concerns about how it was calculated that 20 000 tonnes of Biofuel should be imported annually. If the capacity of the two Pyrolysis plants is 80 000 tonne per annum and it is estimated that 73 600 tonnes of this will be from the Materials Recovery and Fuel Preparation then the deficit will be 6400 tonnes annually. I work under the assumption that the figure of 4400 that is stated at the bottom of Page 7 of the Supporting Statement is merely a typing error. Thus how is it that we go from the figure of 6400 to 20 000 tonnes? I feel that the applicant has not satisfactorily explained the need for the additional 13 600 tonnes of Biofuel being imported over and above the capacity of the site. I trust that these observations can be of some use and can only apologise for the late nature of their submission and for any inconvenience that this causes. Yours sincerely
Stuart Douglas
Hi all, Glasgow Herald Article (more from the PR company) ‘Everyone a winner’ under plan for new waste plant, claims Howie·
· Butcher Simon Howie says many will benefit from his planned waste-to-energy plant at Carnbroe Mark Williamson
Published on 13 Dec 2009 As global leaders argued about how to tackle global warming in Copenhagen last week, one of Scotland’s leading entrepreneurs reiterated his plans to build a waste-to-energy plant in Lanarkshire, although it has run into some opposition locally. Simon Howie, the butcher who built a multi-million pound recycling business as well as a foods operation that employs hundreds of people, has chosen a site by the M8 for a £50m plant that he hopes could be replicated across the country. The 42-year-old believes he has devised a scheme that makes compelling sense at a time when the country’s leaders are desperately trying to find ways to reduce both the amount of rubbish that gets sent to landfill and the quantity of carbon that gets emitted into the atmosphere. Howie’s Shore Energy has submitted a planning application to use a corner of the old Shanks & McEwan site near Carnbroe to build a plant that will be capable of generating enough electricity to power some 10,000 homes. The site is currently home to a tyre recycling plant and some semi-derelict buildings. Rather than relying on finite fossil fuel, the plant will use waste from local households and businesses. Shore said that around 1.7 million tonnes is produced annually in the region around the site. The plant could take 160,000 tonnes. It will separate materials like metal that can be recycled and which make up 50% of the refuse. The biomass that forms the bulk of the residue would be used to produce a gas that will drive a turbine to generate electricity. The process, called pyrolysis, involves subjecting biomass to extreme heat, without setting fire to it. Howie believes that he proved he can find a way of using science and commerce to address pressing problems with the successful Shore Recycling business, which he sold to Viridor for £23m. This was founded by Howie to deal with discarded fridges using smart technology from Germany. He said he thinks everyone will be a winner from the Carnbroe scheme. The plant will avoid burying thousands of tonnes of waste, helping Lanarkshire comply with increasingly onerous targets to reduce the use of landfills. These generate huge amounts of methane. Shore claimed the plant will reduce CO2 emissions by around 143,000 tonnes annually because of the diversion of waste from landfill, the increase in recycled material and the generation of what it says is renewable energy. Local council tax-payers will be spared the financial consequences that councils might face if they fail to meet regulations. In addition to construction jobs in the short term, the plant will create 50 permanent skilled jobs for operators and the like. “This is not a minimum wage type operation,” Howie said. The scheme is currently in the planning process and may go before elected members next year. If he gets the all-clear, Howie said the plant could be built within 18 months and form a model for other schemes around the country. However, in a development that highlights the complexities involved in turning macro aspirations into practical measures, Shore has run into some opposition from some vocal locals, who have organised themselves as Monklands Residents Against Pyrolysis Plant (MRAPP). On the group’s website, MRAPP raise a range of objections. These include claims that there will be emissions of potentially harmful nano- particles from the plant. As the plant will take waste from a 30-mile radius, it will result in increased traffic and noise. MRAPP claims it is more expensive to create electricity using pyrolysis than other methods but that the plant will still generate profits that will go to shareholders rather than the local community. After campaigning outside supermarkets in the area MRAPP’s campaign has received extensive news coverage locally. In an interview with The Herald, the accordion-playing Howie did not show any sign of anger about MRAPP’s activities. Still, he made it clear that these have resulted in some frustrations. Not least among these is the feeling that Shore’s scheme is being criticised for being something that it is not. “There are some fairly strong characters who have whipped up some local feelings. There are some negative feelings around that we want to counter,” he said. “They have got the bit between their teeth and they are keen to paint this as an incinerator.” This is an emotive word in an age when environmental organisations have mounted high profile campaigns to highlight the potential downsides of burning waste. “The key element to this is that we’ve not gone for an incinerator,” said Howie. He stresses that while the plant would come under official thermal treatment guidelines, pyrolysis does not involve burning waste. Thus, it is not an incinerator. Howie dismissed the charge of a critic who said Shore’s scheme could be likened to putting a filter on a cigarette, “Electric cars and diesel are subject to the same regulations but they are completely different. There’s a big difference between a juggernaut and an electric car.” Howie said bodies like Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) and Transport Scotland have not come up with anything negative about the plan, and describes them as stakeholders. Shore recently produced a booklet in which it responded to concerns about the scheme. This included extracts from a letter to the planning authority from SEPA in which it said: “It is understood from the modelled outputs that the impact on local air quality arising out of the emissions from this development will be small.” Howie is adamant that Shore can answer all the project’s critics. “Yes, there are negative attitudes to waste processing in local areas but we have answers in terms of emissions and the effect this is going to have on the area. “We have laid out the facts, we’ve hidden from nothing. We have written to every objector that’s written to us. “The facts are the facts. This waste is there, it’s generated locally and we’re proposing to deal with it locally. The technology that we’ve chosen is not incineration we’re very keen that people will see this.” Howie said anaerobic digestion – a waste-to-energy technology that has generated less controversy than pyrolysis – would not be suitable. This only works with particular types of refuse, like food waste. Still, he said he knows the task of persuading doubters may be complicated by scepticism about the role of private enterprise in addressing public problems. “People will say ‘he’s just doing it for profiteering’,” he said. “A key point is that we’re doing this to build, operate and own, not to get planning and walk away.” |
