Fight goes on to halt Peel waste plant plan

A campaign group has pledged to fight controversial plans to build an anaerobic digestion site in Ramsbottom which have been re-submitted to Bury Council.

The Ramsbottom Against Waste Site (RAWS) group says it will continue to fight the plans, and claims “little has changed” since the proposals were last put forward. The planning application by Peel Environmental was temporarily with-drawn in November, days before it was set to go before the council’s planning committee.

Peel wants to build the site, which would create electricity by using food by-products, and Tamar Energy would build and run the facility at Fletcher Bank Quarry. The electricity would be used by Marshalls to power its activities on the site.

Peel says the new application includes additional information on the air quality impact assessment, and more information about the odour control system. The RAWS group accepts that new investigations have been carried out, but claims that they do not include on-site monitoring within the quarry void, or within Ramsbottom itself.

Cllr Ian Bevan said: “It is unfortunate that a fresh planning application has been submitted by Peel and Marshalls and that it has to undergo the same planning process and consultation as last time.

“I am hoping Bury Council will listen to the wave of protest about this application. In the end, more than 1,000 Ramsbottom residents objected last time round, and very little has changed in this new planning application.”

Karen Pollard-Rylance, chairman of RAWS, added: “Together we must stand as a community and say no to this proposal.”

Peel has defended its application, and says it has consulted with residents in Ramsbottom.

Peel, Tamar Energy and Marshalls held a public information event in Ramsbottom on January 28, and had a meeting with RAWS on the same day.

Kieran Tames, develop-ment surveyor at Peel, said: “We provided further information within the new application to demonstrate that local factors, such as on-site topography and local weather conditions, were fully taken into account in our air quality assess-ment. This robust assessment, combined with the use of enhanced odour control technology, demonstrates our commit-ment to appropriately sited, sustainable and clean energy generation.”

Comments (2)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:27pm Wed 12 Feb 14

Rammy Matters says...

I have seen what Peel & Tamar have added to the application and frankly it adds nothing to what they offered previously. I suspect the only reason they pulled it was they knew their case was rather shaky and it would be beneficial to resubmit and force the RAWS group to regroup and embark on another costly campaign of opposition.

I think this has backfired as the knowledge of this ridiculous proposal has reached a wider audience and has generated far greater opposition!

What we in Ramsbottom do know is that if this is given the green light then the economic and social consequences will be hugely damaging and far -reaching. Ramsbottom has built a substantial local economy on tourism and hospitality, all of which will suffer greatly resulting in many job losses and business collapse due to a proposal which only benefits themselves, and this Peel & Tamar admit.

There are over 1,000 objections on Bury councils planning portal and over 1,800 on another on-line petition set up against this proposal. Does this not evidence the depth of opposition to this ridiculous proposal !?

This insanity has to be stopped!
I have seen what Peel & Tamar have added to the application and frankly it adds nothing to what they offered previously. I suspect the only reason they pulled it was they knew their case was rather shaky and it would be beneficial to resubmit and force the RAWS group to regroup and embark on another costly campaign of opposition. I think this has backfired as the knowledge of this ridiculous proposal has reached a wider audience and has generated far greater opposition! What we in Ramsbottom do know is that if this is given the green light then the economic and social consequences will be hugely damaging and far -reaching. Ramsbottom has built a substantial local economy on tourism and hospitality, all of which will suffer greatly resulting in many job losses and business collapse due to a proposal which only benefits themselves, and this Peel & Tamar admit. There are over 1,000 objections on Bury councils planning portal and over 1,800 on another on-line petition set up against this proposal. Does this not evidence the depth of opposition to this ridiculous proposal !? This insanity has to be stopped! Rammy Matters
  • Score: 13

7:13pm Thu 13 Feb 14

tinton says...

I appreciate the need for impartiality in reporting, however the information from Peel is typically misleading and this is one of the reasons residents do not trust them. Their "public information event" consisted of three hours in which time slots had to be booked by prior telephone appointment - this hardly constitutes a public debate, and was hardly publicised anyway. As last time around, this was more a gesture so they could claim public consultation while ensuring it was extremely limited and no open questions or debate was possible. Tamar never even replied to my letter last year , asking how their system differs from other AD plants which are causing serious odour problems in other communities. They have never built or run one of these yet, they cannot guarantee that similar odour and possible health hazards would not occur. This is a recognised problem with AD Plants, internationally, they are not recommended for siting this close to residential areas. Also, they are misleading in stating they have carried out all the correct testing for this quarry site, which presents particular dispersal problems. An independent qualified assessor found their data inadequate and the new application does not include the rigorous testing that was stated to be necessary. They have shown themselves to be untrustworthy, even underhand in their PR, and inadequate in their scientific data - why should we trust them to run a plant which requires highly sensitive monitoring and exact management, of which they have no prior experience of operating, and which more experienced operators are still failing to control these problems. The Environment Agency has failed to correct the problems in other locations, and they will be even busier with other things now, so if this gets built, and has the same problems as other similar plants, Ramsbottom would be blighted indefitinitely , - those affected at other AD Plant sites describe the smell as "a mixture of dog muck and burnt plastic", and possible hazardous particulates which carries over wide areas . Is it even necessary to say what the effects of this would be on the local economy, house prices, but most of all the quality of life, and possibly health, of local people. There is no need for this waste facility in the region, it is purely a business venture for Peel-Tamar, they would need to truck in feedstock from far afield which cancels out any "green" effect, anyway. There would be only 5 jobs, the plant would cause more loss to the local economy than gain, there is no benefit to the town or people, only Peel-Tamar benefit. I will gladly send links to evidence the points about odour problems if required. Please do not represent this campaign to favour big business over ordinary people who have so little power..
I appreciate the need for impartiality in reporting, however the information from Peel is typically misleading and this is one of the reasons residents do not trust them. Their "public information event" consisted of three hours in which time slots had to be booked by prior telephone appointment - this hardly constitutes a public debate, and was hardly publicised anyway. As last time around, this was more a gesture so they could claim public consultation while ensuring it was extremely limited and no open questions or debate was possible. Tamar never even replied to my letter last year , asking how their system differs from other AD plants which are causing serious odour problems in other communities. They have never built or run one of these yet, they cannot guarantee that similar odour and possible health hazards would not occur. This is a recognised problem with AD Plants, internationally, they are not recommended for siting this close to residential areas. Also, they are misleading in stating they have carried out all the correct testing for this quarry site, which presents particular dispersal problems. An independent qualified assessor found their data inadequate and the new application does not include the rigorous testing that was stated to be necessary. They have shown themselves to be untrustworthy, even underhand in their PR, and inadequate in their scientific data - why should we trust them to run a plant which requires highly sensitive monitoring and exact management, of which they have no prior experience of operating, and which more experienced operators are still failing to control these problems. The Environment Agency has failed to correct the problems in other locations, and they will be even busier with other things now, so if this gets built, and has the same problems as other similar plants, Ramsbottom would be blighted indefitinitely , - those affected at other AD Plant sites describe the smell as "a mixture of dog muck and burnt plastic", and possible hazardous particulates which carries over wide areas . Is it even necessary to say what the effects of this would be on the local economy, house prices, but most of all the quality of life, and possibly health, of local people. There is no need for this waste facility in the region, it is purely a business venture for Peel-Tamar, they would need to truck in feedstock from far afield which cancels out any "green" effect, anyway. There would be only 5 jobs, the plant would cause more loss to the local economy than gain, there is no benefit to the town or people, only Peel-Tamar benefit. I will gladly send links to evidence the points about odour problems if required. Please do not represent this campaign to favour big business over ordinary people who have so little power.. tinton
  • Score: 7

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree