DOCSLIB.ORG

Challenge Booklet

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Challenge Booklet DATE OF ISSUE FONASBA MARCH 2007 THE FEDERATION OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONS OF SHIP BROKERS AND AGENTS 85, Gracechurch Street, London EC3V 0AA Great Britain Tel: + 44 20 7623 3113, e-mail: [email protected], website: www.fonasba.com INTERTANKO POSEIDON CHALLENGE PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY PRESENTED AT THE INTERTANKO HOUSTON TANKER EVENT MARCH 2007 INTERTANKO POSEIDON CHALLENGE — PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY 2007 Page 2 © FONASBA - MARCH 2007 INTERTANKO POSEIDON CHALLENGE — PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY 2007 Page 3 FONASBA’S CONTRIBUTION TO THE POSEIDON CHALLENGE When INTERTANKO launched its “POSEIDON CHALLENGE” in Singapore last year, there was never any question that FONASBA would not throw its full weight behind the ini- tiative. One of FONASBA’s primary objectives as an association is the promotion of high levels of professionalism within the agency and broking sectors wherever and whenever the opportunity arises. At the Singapore event it therefore gave me much pleasure to commit FONASBA to play- ing its part in achieving the “Three Zero’s” that are central to the Challenge and also to of- fering the services of our member associations in developing an industry-led database of port reception facilities as our tangible contribution to the project. One year on, and in conjunction with the INTERTANKO Houston event, FONASBA takes pleasure in publishing this first edition of the guide. I describe it as the first edition because the provision of port waste reception facilities for tankers is an on-going process and it will therefore be necessary to regularly update the information provided. We are aware that there are gaps in its coverage and FONASBA will endeavour to close those gaps in future edi- tions. This is a process that should be seen as a joint effort between FONASBA and other sections of the tanker industry, who are invited to comment on the information provided, or add to it. In passing we would like to recognise the particular situation of our member in Mexico. In spite of their best efforts to contribute to this database they are prevented from doing so because the Mexican government considers port waste reception facilities to be a matter of national security. My colleagues within FONASBA and I very much hope that this publication will be of benefit to INTERTANKO’s “Poseidon Challenge” as well as helping the tanker industry achieve the level of recognition it deserves for its ability to carry vast quantities of oil and oil products around the world in all weathers with an enviably high safety record. PHILIP J. WOOD FICS IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT FONASBA LONDON MARCH 2007 INTERTANKO POSEIDON CHALLENGE — PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY 2007 Page 4 COUNTRY PORT PAGE BULGARIA All Ports 7 CYPRUS Limassol and Larnaca 8 DENMARK All Ports 9 FRANCE Bayonne 10/11 Brest 12 Donges 13/15 Dunkirk 16 Le Havre 17 Marseilles (Lavera/Fos) 18/19 Port Jerome 20 Rouen — Shell BJ3 21 Rouen — Shell NAJ-PAJ-BJ1-BJ2 22 Rouen Rubis-CPA Terminal 23 GREAT BRITAIN Aberdeen — Means Quay 24 Aberdeen — Point Law 25 Aberdeen — Sinclair Road 26 Barry 27 Bristol 28 Cardiff — FAMM-Inver 29 Cardiff — HCB 30 Cardiff — Texaco 31 Coryton 32 Finart 33 Glasgow (Rothesay) 34 Harwich 35 Hull — Saltend 36 Immingham — East Terminal 37 Immingham — Oil Terminal 38 Immingham — South Killingholm 39 Ipswich 40 Nigg Terminal 41 Peterhead — Albert Quay 42 Peterhead — ASCO South 43 Scapa Flow 44 INTERTANKO POSEIDON CHALLENGE — PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY 2007 Page 5 COUNTRY PORT PAGE GREAT BRITAIN Southampton 45 Stanlow — Ship Canal 46 Stanlow — Terminal 47 Sullom Voe 48 Teesside — Conoco Phillips 49 Teesside — Huntsman 50 Thames — Canvey Island 51 Thames — Dagenham 52 Thames — Grays 53 Thames — Littlebrook 54 Thames — Shellhaven 55 Thames — West Thurrock 56 ISRAEL Ashdod 57 Ashkelon 58 Eilat 59 Haifa 60 JAPAN All Ports 61 MALTA Marsaxlokk 62 Valetta 63 MAURITIUS Port Louis 64 MOROCCO Mohammedia 65 POLAND Gdansk/Gdynia 66 Szczecin/Swinoujscie 67 SLOVENIA Koper 68 SOUTH AFRICA Durban 69 East London 70 Walvis Bay 71 SPAIN Barcelona 72 Bilbao 73 Ferrol 74 La Coruña 75 Tarragona 76 Tenerife 77 INTERTANKO POSEIDON CHALLENGE — PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY 2007 Page 6 COUNTRY PORT PAGE USA Philadelphia, New York/New Jersey, Connecticut 78 Philadelphia, Baltimore, Hampton Roads, Norfolk 78 Charleston, Jacksonville, Savannah, Hampton Roads, Newport 79 News, Norfolk, Portsmouth Gulfport, Mobile, Panama City, Pascagoula, Pensacola 80 Galveston, Houston, New Orleans, Port Arthur 80 Mobile, Pascagoula, Pensacola 81 Astoria, Portland, Longview 82 Eureka, San Diego, Los Angeles/Long Beach, Oakland, 82 San Francisco, Seattle, Tacoma, Portland FONASBA POSEIDON CHALLENGE PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY Country: BULGARIA Association: BASBA Port: All Bulgarian ports Terminal: Terminal Operator: Contact Address: Telephone: Fax: E-mail: Does terminal accept slops: Does terminal accept dirty ballast: Via: Storage capacity: Cost: Addl. information All Bulgarian ports and oil terminals can accept dirty ballast and slops through contracts with independent contractors. There are no disposal facilities within the ports. FONASBA POSEIDON CHALLENGE PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY Country: CYPRUS Association: CYPRUS SHIPPING ASSOCIATION Port: LIMASSOL AND LARNACA PORTS Terminal: LIMASSOL AND LARNACA TERMINALS Terminal Operator: VGN SLUDGE LTD Contact Address: 137A OMONIAS STR 3045 LIMASSOL – CYPRUS Telephone: 00357-25-351554 OR 00357-99888408 Fax: 00357-25-562100 E-mail: [email protected] Does terminal Yes accept slops: Does terminal Yes accept dirty ballast: Via: Pipeline + Barge + Storage capacity: 3000 c.m. Cost: As per scale with a minimum charge between CYP: 83 - 271 No Information The Cyprus Shipping Association is at your disposal for any additional available: Information you may require. FONASBA POSEIDON CHALLENGE PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY Country: Denmark Association: Danish Shipbroker’s Association Port: All Danish Ports Terminal: Terminal Operator: Contact Address: Telephone: Fax: E-mail: Does terminal Yes x No accept slops: Does terminal Yes x No accept dirty ballast: Via: Pipeline Barge x Other Storage capacity: Cost: Included in Port Fee No Information available: FONASBA POSEIDON CHALLENGE PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY Country: FRANCE Association: Port: BAYONNE Terminal: LIQUIDE Terminal Operator: L.B.C. Contact Address: Telephone: 05 59 64 48 00 Fax: 05 59 64 48 01 E-mail: [email protected] Does terminal Yes accept slops: Does terminal No accept dirty ballast: Via: TRUCK Storage capacity: ?? Cost: See hereunder contact details of companies (SAADEG and BAB assainissement) No Information available: FONASBA POSEIDON CHALLENGE PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY Country: FRANCE Association: Port: BAYONNE Terminal: ST GOBAIN Terminal Operator: RAFFINERIE DU MIDI Contact Address: Telephone: 05 59 64 71 08 Fax: 05 59 64 81 53 E-mail: Does terminal No accept slops: Does terminal No accept dirty ballast: Via: Storage capacity: Cost: No Information available: COMPANIES BAB ASSAINISSEMENT Phone 00 33 (0) 559 42 56 56 Fax 00 33 (0) 559 42 56 57 SAADEG Phone 00 33 (0) 558 74 60 31 FONASBA POSEIDON CHALLENGE PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY Country: FRANCE Association: FACAM Port: Brest Terminal: Sobrena Shipyard, repair berths 1 and 4, drydocks 2 and 3 Terminal Operator: Yard Operator Contact Address: Telephone: Fax: E-mail: Does terminal Yes accept slops: Does terminal Yes accept dirty ballast: Via: Pipeline Storage capacity: Total capacity 7,500 m3, 2000 m3 always available Cost: Addl. information Deballasting station operated by the Chamber of Commerce of Brest. Vessels at Brest Petroleum terminal (pier QR5) can dispose of sludge and slops by truck but only small quantities can be handled. Disposal can only take place when the vessel is not handling cargo. Alternatively, vessels can shift to one of the berths above, at additional cost. FONASBA POSEIDON CHALLENGE PORT RECEPTION FACILITIES SURVEY Country: FRANCE Association: Port: DONGES Terminal: DONGES #7 Terminal Operator: TOTAL Contact Address: RAFFINERIE TOTAL, Rue Unzaine – 44480 DONGES Telephone: +33 240 905 674 Fax: +33 240 905 788 E-mail: [email protected] Does terminal Yes (by lorry) / abt € 1300 + € 236/ton accept slops: Does terminal No accept dirty ballast: Via: Storage capacity: Cost: No Information available: Country: FRANCE Association: Port: DONGES Terminal: DONGES #6 Terminal Operator: TOTAL Contact Address: RAFFINERIE TOTAL, Rue Unzaine – 44480 DONGES Telephone: +33 240 905 674 Fax: +33 240 905 788 E-mail: [email protected] Does terminal Yes (by lorry) / abt € 1300 + € 236/ton accept slops: Does terminal No accept dirty ballast: Via: Storage capacity: Cost: No Information available: Country: FRANCE Association: Port: DONGES Terminal: DONGES ARCEAU Terminal Operator: SFDM Contact Address: CAMP DE SEM – 44480 DONGES Telephone: +33 240 453 830 Fax: +33 240 910 665 E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected] Does terminal Yes (by lorry) / abt € 1300 + € 236/ton accept slops: Does terminal No accept dirty ballast: Via: Storage capacity: Cost: No Information available: Country: FRANCE Association: Port: DONGES Terminal: DONGES #5 Terminal Operator: TOTAL Contact Address: RAFFINERIE TOTAL, Rue Unzaine – 44480 DONGES Telephone: +33 240 905 674 Fax: +33 240 905 788 E-mail: [email protected] Does terminal Yes (by lorry) / abt € 1300 + € 236/ton accept slops: Does terminal Yes accept dirty ballast: Via: Pipe or flexibles Storage capacity: Abt
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Gec Esfid Final
    Gateway Energy Centre UNDERGROUND GGAS PIPELINE AND ASSOCIATED ABOVE GROUND INSTALLATION ENVIRONMENTAAL STATEMENT FURTHER INFORMATION DOCUMENT Prepared by July 2011 CONTENTS Page LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS PREFACE 1 1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background to the ES FID 1 1.2 Relationship between the ES and ES FID 1 2 PLANNING AND ENERGY POLICY 5 2.1 Overview 5 3 GAS PIPELINE ROUTE AND AGI LOCATION SELECTION 7 3.1 Response to Thurrock Council 7 4 CONSTRUCTION METHODS AND OPERATION 9 4.1 Response to Oikos Storage Ltd (Agent: Adams Hendry) 9 5 LAND USE 10 5.1 Response to Shell (Agent: Jones Lang LeSalle) 10 6 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL 18 6.1 Response to Thurrock Council 18 7 LAND USE / GEOLOGY, HYDROLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY 24 7.1 Response to Thurrock Council 24 8 CULTURAL HERITAGE 24 8.1 Response to ECC (Historic Environment Branch) 24 9 INDIRECT / SECONDARY AND CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 25 9.1 Response to Thurrock Council 25 9.2 Update to the March 2011 ES Section 18 (Indirect / Secondary and Cumulative Impacts) 27 APPENDIX A REPRESENTATIONS MADE BY THRID PARTIES TO TTGDC APPENDIX B UPDATES TO MARCH 2011 ES SECTIONS 2 AND 3 APPENDIX C UPDATE TO MARCH 2011 ES SECTION 6 APPENDIX D SUBSTITUTION OF MARCH 2011 ES SECTION 15 APPENDIX E UPDATE TO MARCH 2011 ES SECTION 18 57 GEC Underground Gas Pipeline and Associated Above Ground Installation July 2011 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 3LPE 3 layer polyethylene AC Alternating Current ACC Air Cooled Condenser AGI Above Ground Installation AOD Above Ordnance Datum AUT Automatic Ultrasonic Testing BAP Biodiversity Action Plan BP British
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Recommendations on the Future Electoral Arrangements for Thurrock
    Draft recommendations on the future electoral arrangements for Thurrock May 2001 LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION FOR ENGLAND The Local Government Commission for England is an independent body set up by Parliament. Our task is to review and make recommendations to the Government on whether there should be changes to local authorities’ electoral arrangements. Members of the Commission are: Professor Malcolm Grant (Chairman) Professor Michael Clarke CBE (Deputy Chairman) Peter Brokenshire Kru Desai Pamela Gordon Robin Gray Robert Hughes CBE Barbara Stephens (Chief Executive) We are statutorily required to review periodically the electoral arrangements – such as the number of councillors representing electors in each area and the number and boundaries of wards and electoral divisions – of every principal local authority in England. In broad terms our objective is to ensure that the number of electors represented by each councillor in an area is as nearly as possible the same, taking into account local circumstances. We can recommend changes to ward boundaries, and the number of councillors and ward names. We can also make recommendations for change to the electoral arrangements of parish councils in the borough. © Crown Copyright 2001 Applications for reproduction should be made to: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Copyright Unit The mapping in this report is reproduced from OS mapping by the Local Government Commission for England with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Licence Number: GD 03114G. This report is printed on recycled paper.
    [Show full text]
  • 2014:Layout 2 5/3/14 19:22 Page 1 Port of London Authority Handbook 2014 the Port of Tilbury London’S Link to World Trade
    PLA final cover 2014:Layout 2 5/3/14 19:22 Page 1 Port of London Authority Handbook 2014 The Port of Tilbury London’s link to world trade • Closest deepwater port to London • Serving huge South East UK market • Britain’s greenest port – a leader on environmental issues • A truly multimodal port with excellent rail and road links • Skilled workforce handling diverse commodities • Multi-million pound investments – creating jobs and growth Constantly adapting to changing demands... Please contact Port of Tilbury on: 01375 852200 | Port of Tilbury London Ltd, Leslie Ford House, Tilbury Freeport, Tilbury, Essex, RM18 7EH | www.forthports.co.uk Published in association with The Port of London Authority by Compass Publications Ltd Publisher James P Moriarty Sales Director Andy Bullen Editorial Felicity Landon Photography Andy Wallace Samuel Ashfield Ford Motor Company Nick Strugnell Gavin Parsons Rob Powell Dan Harwood Alistair Gale Book Design Pearce Marchbank Production Editor Linda Roast Cartographer Lee Ash Print Swallowtail Print The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the publisher, the Port of London Authority, nor any other organisation associated with this publication. No liability can be accepted for inaccuraciesof any description, although the publishers would be pleased to receive amendments for possible inclusion in future editions. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying or scanning, without the prior permission of the publishers. Such written permission must also be obtained before any part of the publication is stored in a retrieval system of any nature. March 2014 ISSN 1353-7482 ©2014 Compass Publications Ltd COMPASS31st Edition PUBLICATIONS LTD.
    [Show full text]
  • Modified UK National Implementation Measures for Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading System
    Modified UK National Implementation Measures for Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading System As submitted to the European Commission in April 2012 following the first stage of their scrutiny process This document has been issued by the Department of Energy and Climate Change, together with the Devolved Administrations for Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. April 2012 UK’s National Implementation Measures submission – April 2012 Modified UK National Implementation Measures for Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading System As submitted to the European Commission in April 2012 following the first stage of their scrutiny process On 12 December 2011, the UK submitted to the European Commission the UK’s National Implementation Measures (NIMs), containing the preliminary levels of free allocation of allowances to installations under Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading System (2013-2020), in accordance with Article 11 of the revised ETS Directive (2009/29/EC). In response to queries raised by the European Commission during the first stage of their assessment of the UK’s NIMs, the UK has made a small number of modifications to its NIMs. This includes the introduction of preliminary levels of free allocation for four additional installations and amendments to the preliminary free allocation levels of seven installations that were included in the original NIMs submission. The operators of the installations affected have been informed directly of these changes. The allocations are not final at this stage as the Commission’s NIMs scrutiny process is ongoing. Only when all installation-level allocations for an EU Member State have been approved will that Member State’s NIMs and the preliminary levels of allocation be accepted.
    [Show full text]
  • Internal Draft Version June 2006)
    (Internal Draft Version June 2006) THURROCK LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK (LDF) SITE SPECIFIC ALLOCATIONS AND POLICIES “ISSUES AND OPTIONS” DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT [DPD] INFORMAL CONSULTATION DRAFT CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. STRATEGIC & POLICY CONTEXT 4 3. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BOROUGH 6 4. KEY PRINCIPLES 7 5. RELATIONSHIP WITH CORE STRATEGY VISION, 7 OBJECTIVES & ISSUES 6. SITE SPECIFIC PROVISIONS 8 7. MONITORING & IMPLEMENTATION 19 8. NEXT STEPS 19 APPENDICES 20 GLOSSARY OF TERMS REFERENCE LIST INTERNAL DRAFT VERSION JUNE 2006 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 We would like to get your views on future development and planning of Thurrock to 2021. A new system of “Spatial Planning” has been introduced that goes beyond traditional land-use planning and seeks to integrate the various uses of land with the various activities that people use land for. The new spatial plans must involve wider community consultation and involvement and be based on principles of sustainable development. 1.2 The main over-arching document within the LDF portfolio is the Core Strategy. This sets out the vision, objectives and strategy for the development of the whole area of the borough. The Site Specific Allocations and Policies is very important as it underpins the delivery of the Core Strategy. It enables the public to be consulted on the various specific site proposals that will guide development in accordance with the Core Strategy. 1.3 Many policies in the plans will be implemented through the day-to-day control of development through consideration of planning applications. This document also looks at the range of such Development Control policies that might be needed.
    [Show full text]
  • BP P.L.C. Group Results Third Quarter and Nine Months 2018 Highlights Third Quarter Financial Summary
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE London 30 October 2018 BP p.l.c. Group results Third quarter and nine months 2018 Highlights Strong earnings driven by high reliability and major project delivery • Strong earnings and cash flow: – Underlying replacement cost profit for the third quarter of 2018 was $3.8 billion, more than double a year earlier and the highest quarterly result in more than five years, including significant earnings growth from the Upstream and Rosneft. – Operating cash flow excluding Gulf of Mexico oil spill payments for the quarter was $6.6 billion, including a $0.7 billion working capital build (after adjusting for inventory holding gains). – Gulf of Mexico oil spill payments in the quarter were $0.5 billion on a post-tax basis. – Dividend of 10.25 cents a share for the third quarter, 2.5% higher than a year earlier. • Strong operating performance: – Very good reliability, with the highest quarterly refining availability for 15 years and BP-operated Upstream plant reliability of 95%. – Reported oil and gas production was 3.6 million barrels of oil equivalent a day. Upstream underlying production, which excludes Rosneft and is adjusted for portfolio changes and pricing effects, was 6.8% higher than a year earlier, driven by ramp-up of new projects. Rosneft production of 1.2 million barrels of oil equivalent a day was 2.8% higher than last year. • Strategic delivery: – The Thunder Horse Northwest expansion project in the Gulf of Mexico and the Western Flank B project in Australia began production in October, both ahead of schedule. They are BP’s fourth and fifth Upstream major projects to start up in 2018.
    [Show full text]
  • Gateway Energy Centre Environmental Statement
    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Parsons Brinkerhoff Ltd. (PB) was commissioned by Gateway Energy Centre Limited (GECL) to undertake a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) at the proposed site of the Gateway Energy Centre (GEC) Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT) Power Station. The aim of this FRA is to determine the risk of flooding to the site and the potential flooding impact of the development on the surrounding area. The proposed GEC site is located on the banks of the River Thames, near Coryton in Thurrock. The site is approximately 11.3 ha and forms one of several plots of land within the former Thames Haven Oil Refinery. Alongside development of the GEC, the remainder of the Thames Haven landholding will be developed as the London Gateway (LG) Logistics and Business Park (for further information on the LG Logistics and Business Park and the wider LG Development see the Environmental Statement (ES) Volume 1 of the GEC ES). A Level 3 FRA has already been undertaken for the LG Development as a whole. This FRA indicates that the GEC site is at risk from tidal flooding from the Thames Estuary, particularly from storm surge tides. However, it also indicates that the site is currently protected by flood defences which offer adequate protection of the site from both a 1 in 200 and 1 in 1,000 year flood event. This FRA also indicates that a new dock and quay wall will be constructed as part of the LG Port development which will provide extra protection to the site, beyond the predicted 1 in 1,000 year flood event throughout the lifespan of the CCGT site, even taking into consideration the affects of climate change.
    [Show full text]
  • Tilbury Green Power Facility Planning Statement
    Tilbury Green Power Facility Planning Statement February 2008 TILBURY GREEN POWER FACILITY PLANNING STATEMENT CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Need for Sustainable Energy 2.3 Choice of Site 2.4 Consultation 3.0 APPLICATION 3.1 Electricity Act 1989 3.2 Application for Consent 3.3 Carbon Assessment 4.0 LOCATION, SITE, OTHER PLANNING DECISIONS, DEVELOPMENT 4.1 Location 4.2 Site 4.3 Other Planning Decisions 4.4 Proposed Development 5.0 DEVELOPMENT PLAN 5.1 Background 5.2 Regional Planning Guidance for the South East 2001 – (RPG9) 5.3 Thurrock Borough Local Plan (1997) (TBLP) 6.0 OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS 6.1 Background 6.2 Draft East of England Plan 6.3 Government Planning Policy 6.4 Government Energy and Other Policies 6.5 Local Development Framework 6.6 Thurrock Thames Gateway 7.0 PLANNING ASSESSMENT 7.1 Background 7.2 Planning Assessment 8.0 CONCLUSIONS 8.1 Climate Change/Renewable Energy 8.2 Waste Management 8.3 Land Use 8.4 Environment 8.5 Transport 8.6 Economic 8.7 Overall DOCUMENTS A Alternative Site Survey B Abbreviations 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.0.1 This Statement accompanies an application (Application) to the Secretary of State for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) by Tilbury Green Power (TGP), seeking consent under Section 36 Electricity Act 1989 and deemed planning permission under Section 90 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to develop a 60 megawatt (MW) electricity generating plant at the former Cargill sweeteners manufacturing plant at Tilbury Docks (Site). This Application is viewed as EIA (environmental impact assessment) development and is accompanied by an environmental statement (ES).
    [Show full text]
  • Essex County Fire & Rescue Service
    Essex County Fire & Rescue Service Our Values: Respect, Accountability, Openness and Involvement Strategic Risk Assessment of the Medium to Longer-Term Service Operating Environment 2009 – 2010 2 Countywide Review 2009 Contents 1. Foreword .......................................................................................................................................4 2. Introduction ..................................................................................................................................5 3. Executive Summary .................................................................................................................6 4. Climate Change in East of England ................................................................................10 5. Demographics of Essex ......................................................................................................22 6. Diversity .......................................................................................................................................26 7. Older People in Essex ...........................................................................................................32 8. County Development and Transport Infrastructure ...............................................40 9. The Changing Face of Technology ................................................................................57 10. Terrorism .....................................................................................................................................62
    [Show full text]
  • Dp World London Gateway Examination of the New Castle Point Local Plan (Cplp)
    DP WORLD LONDON GATEWAY EXAMINATION OF THE NEW CASTLE POINT LOCAL PLAN (CPLP) RESPONSE TO INSPECTORS MATTERS, ISSUES AND QUESTIONS STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF DP WORLD LONDON GATEWAY MATTER 7: DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT POLICIES EB/4145-5735-4540/5 1 DPWLG&TEPL CPBC Local Plan Examination Matter 7 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 3 2. Local Plan Examination Correspondence ................................................................................................ 3 3. The Sorrells Roundabout and Stanford Interchange ............................................................................... 3 4. Cumulative Impact .................................................................................................................................. 4 5. MIQs ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 List of Appendices 1. Stanford-le-Hope Area Plan..................................................................................................................... 7 2. Thurrock Area Plan .................................................................................................................................. 9 3. Sorrells Roundabout Layout .................................................................................................................. 11 4. Stanford Interchange Junction
    [Show full text]
  • Permit ID Installation ID Operator Name Installation Name 2013 2014
    Installation Operator Name Installation Name 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Permit ID ID DTI1015 204463 Premier Oil E&P UK Ltd Voyager Spirit FPSO 72,740 37,302 36,642 35,981 35,321 34,660 33,999 33,339 DTI1016 202656 Ithaca Energy UK Limited Athena 41,458 40,737 40,015 39,294 0000 DTI9910 207103 EnQuest Heather Limited EnQuest Producer 0 0 14,726 79,970 78,502 77,033 75,565 74,097 CNR International (UK) Petrojarl Banff DTI9950 206523 0 26,039 31,970 31,394 30,818 30,241 29,665 29,088 Limited FPSO Nexen Petroleum U.K. DTI9960 206591 Golden Eagle 0 6,010 26,378 27,736 27,227 26,718 26,209 25,699 Limited Anasuria Operating DTI9991 715 Anasuria 43,325 13,457 41,811 22,330 40,264 39,479 38,684 37,887 Company Limited DTI9999 8 Premier Oil E&P UK Ltd Balmoral 34,174 33,580 32,980 32,379 31,760 31,140 30,513 29,884 GB-DTI0200 2 Centrica Storage Ltd Rough 47/3B 66,144 64,995 63,833 62,658 30,736 30,136 29,530 28,921 GB-DTI0300 3 EnQuest Heather Limited Kittiwake Alpha 61,921 60,846 14,940 29,329 57,547 56,425 55,288 54,148 GB-DTI0400 4 Apache North Sea Limited Forties Alpha 69,336 68,131 66,913 65,682 64,437 63,181 61,909 60,632 GB-DTI0600 6 Apache North Sea Limited Forties Charlie 47,229 46,409 45,579 44,740 43,892 43,037 42,170 41,300 GB-DTI0700 7 Apache North Sea Limited Forties Delta 66,347 65,195 64,029 62,851 61,660 60,458 59,240 58,019 ConocoPhillips (UK) GB-DTI1000 10 Britannia 286,653 281,674 276,637 271,547 266,402 261,207 255,947 250,670 Britannia Limited GB-DTI-1001 693 Chrysaor Limited Lomond 65,871 64,727 63,570 62,400 61,218 60,024 58,815 57,603 GB-DTI-1002 696 Chrysaor Limited Everest North 41,385 40,666 39,939 39,204 38,461 37,711 36,952 36,190 GB-DTI1003 686 Britoil Ltd Bruce 142,795 280,628 137,805 270,538 265,413 260,237 254,997 249,739 Spirit Energy North Sea Oil Sevan Marine GB-DTI-1010 1123 127,129 124,921 122,687 120,430 118,148 115,844 113,512 111,171 Limited Hummingbird GB-DTI1011 18 Perenco UK Limited Thames Alpha 23,338 22,933 0 0 0000 Nexen Petroleum U.K.
    [Show full text]
  • United Kingdom Overview
    ‹ Countries United Kingdom Last Updated: June 3, 2014 (Notes) full report Overview The United Kingdom is the largest producer of oil and the second-largest producer of natural gas in the European Union. Following years of exports of petroleum and natural gas, the UK became a net importer of all fossil fuels for the first time in 2013. The United Kingdom (UK) is the sixth largest economy in the world, as well as the largest producer of oil and the second-largest producer of natural gas in the European Union (EU). Following years of exports of both fuels, the UK became a net importer of natural gas and crude oil in 2004 and 2005, respectively. Production from UK oil and natural gas fields peaked around the late 1990s and has declined steadily over the past several years as the discovery of new reserves and new production has not kept pace with the maturation of existing fields. The UK became a net importer of petroleum products in 2013, making it a net importer of all fossil fuels for the first time. The UK government, aware of the country's increasing reliance on imported fuels, has developed key energy policies to address the domestic production declines. These include: using enhanced recovery from current and maturing oil and gas fields, promoting energy efficiency, decreasing the use of fossil fuels and thus reliance on imports, promoting energy trade cooperation with Norway, and decarbonizing the UK economy by investing heavily in renewable energy. However, for the UK to decarbonize its economy, huge investments in the energy infrastructure are needed.
    [Show full text]