FILE REFERENCE: PL16.227487
DEVELOPMENT: Erection of a 100 megawatt electricity power generating station designed to operate in combined heat and power (CHP) mode and all associated site works and services.
LOCATION: Tawnaghmore Upper and Tawnaghmore Lower, Killala, County Mayo.
APPLICATION
Applicant: Mayo Power Limited.
Planning Authority: Mayo County Council
P.A. reference: P07/707
P.A. decision: To grant permission.
APPEAL
Appeal type: Third Party
Appellants: 1. Killala Community Council 2. Michael O’Donnell 3. An Taisce 4. Asahi Development Committee
INSPECTOR Öznur Yücel-Finn
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 1 of 86 CONTENTS Page
1. INTRODUCTION
2. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
3. SITE AND LOCATIONAL CONTEXT
4. EIS
5. PLANNING AUTHORITY’S DECISION
6. PLANNING HISTORY
7. GROUNDS OF APPEAL • Killala Community Council • Michael O’Donnell • An Taisce • Asahi Development Committee
8. FIRST PARTY RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF APPEAL
9. OBSERVATIONS • Peatland Council • An Taisce observations on other appeals • George and Robert Carroll • Friends of the Irish Environment • P.J. Mc Namara and others • North Mayo Peat Industrial Committee • Asahi Development Committee observations on other appeals
10. RELEVANT POLICIES AND GUIDELINES
11. COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROVISIONS
12. ASSESSMENT
13. RECOMMENDATION
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 2 of 86 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 This is a third party appeal against the decision of Mayo County Council to grant permission for a development of 100 megawatt electricity power station designed to operate in combined heat and power (CHP) mode.
The application is accompanied by an EIS (it is below the threshold of 300MW where one would be mandatory).
The proposed power station would be subject to an IPPC Licence and would be required to obtain a GHG (Greenhouse Gas) Permit from the EPA.
1.2 The grounds of appeal presented by four parties relate at the macro level to climate change and greenhouse emissions, sustainability, contravention of government policy in relation to energy future of Ireland, and inadequacy of the submitted EIS.
Some maintain that the proposed development is located in the wrong location within the county or that the type of fuel used is inappropriate.
At a local level concerns are expressed regarding pollution and smoke, health and safety issues, future conversion to an incinerator, traffic safety, lack of proper infrastructure, impact on the natural beauty of the area, visual impact and impact on tourism.
2. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
2.1 The proposed development is described in full in the public notice. It basically involves construction of a 100 megawatt combined heat and power (CHP) plant designed to generate steam alongside electricity.
It is envisaged that the steam from the process will be made available to industrial users utilising the adjoining sites.
The project is described to have a detachable power load which means a source of electricity that can be dispatched at the request of the grid operator, that is, turned on (or off) on demand.
2.2 The fuel proposed for the power plant is a mixture of wood, peat and coal in various proportions. Two possible scenarios are outlined:
High Bio-mass usage – 40% wood, 40% peat, 20% coal
Low Bio-mass usage – 25% wood, 40% peat, 35% coal.
The requirements would be in the region of 250,000 – 400,000 tonnes of wood, 260,000 – 400,000 tonnes of peat and 58,000-104,000 tonnes of coal. These would be mixed with oil/gas as the start-up fuel. Also required would be lime to be used in the fluidised bed boilers.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 3 of 86 Also required would be approximately 15,000 tonnes per annum of ground limestone to reduce the sulphur emissions.
2.3 The power station would create significant quantities of ash between 32,000 and 38,000 tonnes per annum depending on the fuel scenarios.
2.4 The basic structures in the proposed development would involve a power station plant which would operate for 8,000 hours per year (equal to 11 months) with programmed shutdown and maintenance of 760 hours (equal to 1 month).
The electricity would be exported to the national grid and the steam would be used by industries located in close proximity to the power station.
A number of structures are proposed details of which are outlined below: Table 3.1 Indicative Footprint Areas and Heights of Key Structures of the Proposal
Structure Areas (m 2) Heights (m)
Turbine House 1,472 24.5 Boiler House 1,042 50 Bag Filter 680 41.25 Stack 30 70 Administration Building and Workshop 543 15.35 Electrical Annexe 537 10.5 Transformers 222 8.4 Demineralisation Plant Building 250 8.4 Cooling Towers 1,207 16.5 Woodchip Store 5,560 17.7 Peat Store 3,190 14.8 Coal Store 3,500 22 Ash Silos 242 33 Garage and Amenities Building 300 + 450 10.85 Switchroom 150 3
The boiler house would be a fully enclosed steel structure. It is described as a circulating fluidised bed boiler (CFB). In such boilers sand, limestone and fuel ash would form the bed material. Typically combustion would take place at 850 – 900º centigrade bed temperatures.
It is stated that CFBs would offer high combustion efficiency, low sulphur dioxide (SO 2), low nitrogen oxides (NO x) emissions and low carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbon emissions, and and stable operating conditions.
Turbine House would be a full enclosed steel structure incorporating acoustic encasement where required. The steam turbine is stated to be designed to
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 4 of 86 operate in either power generating mode only or in the combined heat and power mode.
2.5 The transformer would be an outdoor three phase transformer exporting electricity to the existing 110 kV transmission substation adjacent to the existing ESB peaking plant via a buried cable.
The total power station area is stated to be about 21.66 hectares of which approximately 20.05 hectares of land would be acquired by Mayo Power Limited. Further 1.6 hectares would be leased under long-term arrangement.
I shall refer to the five main components of the proposal i.e. power station plant, fuel and material management, processed water management, ash management, ancillary facilities in a later chapter under EIS.
3. SITE AND LOCATIONAL CONTEXT
3.1 The appeal site is located in the former Asahi Business Park. A portion of the industrial estate was originally occupied by Asahi Chemical Industry Company synthetic fibre manufacturing plant which operated from 1977 until 1998. The manufacturing plant and associated buildings occupied some 30 hectares of the total site area of 160 hectares.
3.2 The purpose built industrial estate is adjacent to the Regional Route R314 Ballina – Ballycastle Road approximately 3.2 kilometres south of the town of Killala in County Mayo and 9 kilometres north-west of the town of Ballina.
A number of businesses are now located on the original 30 hectare operational site of Asahi. These include:
• Electricity Supply Board (ESB) – 50 megawatts peaking plant and substation. (This plant provides electricity to the national grid only at times of higher demand. Electricity is generated by diesel generators).
• SCHÜTZ (Ireland) Limited – supply of intermediate bulk containers (IBC) to the soft drinks industry.
• John Hogan – Artist, Blacksmith road iron materials and goods.
• Michael Honan and Associates – office use.
There are a number of buildings and structures unoccupied and in a neglected state within the industrial estate including the western portion of what was once the Asahi spinning process building and what was once the Asahi storage building.
3.3 The general area surrounding the business park is a rural agricultural area with some scrub or rough grazing. The industrial estate located on a high plateau
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 5 of 86 has commanding views over the surrounding area and is visible from a considerable area.
There is some ribbon development along the regional road and other roads along the road frontage of some farmland. There is a small cluster of dwellings at the junction of Mullafarry Road (running along the southern boundary of the industrial estate) and the Regional road.
It is stated in the Planning Authority’s report that there are some 38 dwellings within a 500 metre radius of the proposed development some of which are farmhouses associated with agricultural land. Nine dwellings are stated to be located at the junction of the road to Mullafarry and R314. The nearest dwelling to the proposed development is stated to be approximately 40 metres from development boundary and 280 metres from the main operational area.
3.4 Lisglennon Water Treatment Plant owned and operated by Mayo County Council is stated to be located approximately 1 kilometre west of the proposed development along the road to Mullafarry.
3.5 A large limestone quarry referred to as Mullafarry Quarry producing limestone aggregates, pre-coated stone, asphalt, manufacturing blocks and paviors and other products is located approximately 2 kilometres west of the proposed development.
In the application submissions, the site is examined in three distinct areas namely A, B, C. Of these:
Area A currently consisted of disused structures, buildings and equipment such as water treatment plant, effluent treatment plant, boiler house and boiler plant, compressor and refrigeration building, cooling towers. Area B approximately 12. 9 is stated to be owned by Mayo County Council and currently used for grazing of livestock and horses. It is stated that Mayo Power Limited proposes to purchase Area B prior to construction and operation of the proposed power station. Area C includes a reservoir that Asahi use to receive raw water from Lough Conn. This area covered approximately 1.6 hectare and associated pumphouse, pipework, pumps and equipment which are disused. This is the area that would be leased by the developer.
4. EIS
The EIS is presented in four volumes (Non-Technical Summary, Main text, A3 Figures and Appendices). In Volume 2 the main text is presented in group format under the headings following those outlined in the Guidelines by the EPA.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 6 of 86 4.1 Introduction
This section provides the Mayo Power Limited profile and EIS methodology, consultation processes and summary of views, difficulties encountered during the study and references. The proposed commencement date for commercial operations is indicated to be 2011.
The general EIS methodology is described as follows:
• Basis for assessment. • Impact assessment and mitigation. • Significance of environmental issues.
Under the impact basis for assessment the existing environmental conditions would be examined for each element, followed by determination of potential impact associated with the proposal during the construction and operational basis. The impact assessment compared four scenarios namely:
• Do-minimum (assuming that the power station is not constructed with scenarios given for 2011 and 2026).
• Do-something (assuming construction of the power station and examining the year of 2011 being the first year of operation).
• Do-something scenario assuming construction of the power station and examining the year of 2026 (15 years after the commercial operating date of 2011).
Two possible operational scenarios were considered for assessment
• high biomass feed – 40% wood, 40% peat, 20% coal
• low biomass feed – 25% wood, 40% peat, 35% coal.
The high biomass feed operational scenario estimated potentially a higher number of vehicle movements of two scenarios and is considered the worst case scenario for traffic movements.
Impact assessment and mitigation would follow an iterative process linking to the design development process. In assessing the significant potential impacts or effects, the probability, duration, magnitude and intensity of the impacts were considered in relation to the existing environment conditions and significance. Where no impact or minimum impact was predicted to design the power station and associated infrastructure remain unchanged while where significant adverse impacts were predicted mitigation measures were proposed to avoid or minimise the impacts incorporating measures into the design of the proposal where feasible.
The EIS outlines the consultation processes with the local community and with Mayo County Council.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 7 of 86 4.2 Background to the Project
This section outlines the background to the development including the need for the power station, principle design objectives, alternatives considered and the design basis and associated constraints.
4.3 The Need
Under the EIS refers to significant growth in economic activity and urban growth in the region and various government policies which they state has resulted in pressure being placed on existing infrastructure provisions and in particular on the availability of power supply. Referring the growth and energy demand linked with consistent rises in the GNP and population increases the EIS concludes that the trends are forecast to continue in the medium term, and a corresponding rise in energy demand for forecast for the region.
In paragraph 2.2.3.1 the EIS states that there is deficit base load power supply in the west and north-west which created potentially a disincentive for the location of new industries in the wider area. In their view introduction of a new power station would not only increase a quantity of power supply in the area and potentially encourage larger industry into the region, but might also facilitate the introduction of further wind power onto the grid.
The EIS refers to government and European policy in relation to energy supply and in particular the three main pillars as outlined in the EU Green Paper namely ‘security of supply, sustainability, and competitiveness’ and the targets for renewable electricity. It also refers to the Bio-energy Action Plan and the potential bio-mass would have in the State’s bio-energy strategy.
The EIS states that wood is seen by the Action Plan as being the most versatile of renewable energy sources and could be used in generating electricity, heat or as part of a CHP system. The Action Plan referred to the EU Directive on promotion of renewable energy sourced electricity and established a target of 30% co-firing in peat stations with biomass by 2015 resulting in 30,000 hectare of indigenous crops replacing 10%of all peat used at present.
According to Sustainable Energy Ireland the CHP in Ireland was currently only 110 megawatts and had declined since 2005 due to closure of a number of CHP plants. The government, in its White Paper, had established a target for growth that would bring the CHP up to 400 megawatt (an increase of 289 megawatts) by 2010. the proposed development would help towards achieving these targets.
In Section 2.2.4 the EIS refers to government policy on redevelopment of ‘brownfield’ sites and states that this was also the subject of EU initiatives. In many cases this had the advantage of beneficially reutilising infrastructural development in the hinterland of the site or the site which was provided for the original development. The EPA policy on brownfield site redevelopment of October 2005 (Appendix A2.1.B4) was of particular relevance as the site had
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 8 of 86 an extant IPPC Licence in place for the previous Asahi activities. The portion of the former Asahi site being considered for the proposed development was subject to a site investigation process to establish the presence or absence of historical soil, groundwater and surface water contamination (summarised in Chapters 11 and 12) showed that no environmental significant contamination was present which would preclude the development. The site was not subject to any limitations in relation to waste licensing by the EPA as stipulated in their brownfield policy document.
The EIS maintained that the project made significant beneficial reuse of the water supply, discharge pipeline, and nearby grid connections without adverse environmental impact and would be subject to IPPC Licence control by the EPA.
The proposed development also fitted within previously determined industrial use of the site and the zoning.
The EIS described the principle design objectives as:
• 100 megawatt gross electric output power station in County Mayo. • Consider and implement sustainable measures in the design and operation of the power station where possible. • To provide employment opportunities for the local community during construction and operation of the power station. • Develop a power station which is unobtrusive as possible and sympathetic to the surrounding area and local community. • Construct a power station which through the publishing of BATT will operate safely, flexibly, reliably, efficiently and meet all environmental standards and regulations. • To deliver project which satisfies all of the above within reasonable economic constraints.
4.4 Main Alternatives Considered
Range of alternatives and options considered included:
• Alternative sites for location of the proposed power station. • Power station layout options. • Selection of fuel types. • Alternative technologies for the power plant. • Alternative options for disposal of ash.
The site selection process was conducted at two principle levels namely regional and local.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 9 of 86 The regional site selection for a thermal electricity generating station considered
• The shortage of power and transmission capacity in the area as noted in the Regional Planning Guidelines and County Development Plan (Section 4 of the EIS).
• Significant potential for supply of local fuel sources (timber and peat).
• Great potential in the area for wind power supported by a base load on electricity grid.
• Existing deficiency in power infrastructure including power generation which inhibited development in the region.
The EIS referred to a feasibility study carried out for a 30 megawatt peat fuelled electricity generating plant at Bangor Erris, County Mayo in 2001 which concluded that this was not economic but might be feasible if amended or subsidised.
The current proposal addressed the difficulties stated in the said report by increasing the size of the power plant, by use of combined heat and power, use of mixed fuel to include wood and coal and amended location.
4.4.1 Under local site selection the criteria were
• proximity to source of peat supply, • proximity to source of wood supply, • proximity to a suitable port for importation of coal, • proximity to a source of limestone, • proximity to industrial sites for use of steam by industries, • proximity to a national electricity grid connection, • availability of adequate water supply, • proximity of a potential labour force, • good road access, • reuse of brownfield site, • good ground conditions for foundations, • suitable topography for the development of large structures, • absence of specific amenity conservation or other exclusionary area designations.
A number of sites were identified using the regional and local site selection site criteria which included
• Bangor Erris, • Bellacorick, • former Asahi site, Tawnaghmore, Killala.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 10 of 86 The EIS examined each of these sites against the criteria given above and concluded:
• The Bangor Erris site scores well on proximity to the peat supply but poorly on most other factors and in particular its remoteness from other fuel sources, including limestone, grid connection and population centres and potential associated industries.
• Bellacorick site scored well on its proximity to the peat supply and certain necessary infrastructure (grid connection and water supply) there was also potential of using a brownfield site but it was removed from wood, coal and limestone and there was no industrial infrastructure that might benefit from the associated steam supply. It was also remote from population centres.
• Tawnaghmore scored better on all criteria considered compared to the other sites assessed. While somewhat more remote from potential peat supplies than the other two sites it was graded superior with regard to proximity to wood supplies, coal supplies, limestone supplies and population centres. Much of the necessary infrastructure (grid connection, water supply) was available. There was good access and it presented an opportunity not only to reuse a brownfield site but also to encourage reuse of a major adjoining industrial complex.
4.4.2 In relation to the power station layout options the EIS stated that an outdoor plant design was considered too obtrusive to the surrounding area and local community. Provision of a plant within buildings through clearly not the most economic option, had considerable benefits in terms of aesthetic appearance day and night, minimisation of noise and dust levels, and provision of a safe and clean working environment.
While initially a 14 acre area on the Asahi Business Park was considered for the power station following examination of specific fuel storage and plant handling requirements a 32 acre plot referred to as Area B was included in the development proposals to include the log storage yard, ash silos and material handling building and garage and parking area for delivery vehicles and dry detention basin.
4.4.3 Regarding fuel type and mixture selection, two scenarios were looked at, described as high and low biomass feed scenarios. As a start-up fuel natural gas or light oil were considered and the preferred option was oil as it could be knowingly be purchased and stored on the site. The EIS states that installation of gas supply infrastructure and storage could be considered as an option subject to future planning applications.
4.4.4 Section 2.4.4 of the EIS describes the selection of key technologies and alternative options for water supply treatment and discharge, for boiler furnaces, for nitrogen oxides and controlled technologies and for cooling.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 11 of 86 4.4.5 In Section 2.5 the EIS describes the main alternative scheme design options for ash disposal for the two streams of ash namely, Furnace bottom ash (FBA), and Pulverised fly ash (PFA).
The FBA formed approximately 10% of the total ash produced by weight while the PFA formed the remaining 90%. In terms of ash disposal two options were considered.
• Option 1 was disposal of ash through utilisation as a materials input. This was the preferred option having regard to the increasing costs and diminishing landfill capacity.
• Option 2 was disposal of ash to landfill. Three phases were examined using a search criteria of approximately 40 kilometre from the proposed power station site. A commercially viable transportation distance and a number of exclusion areas. Table 2.4 of the EIS summarised the sites and their potential as an ash landfill concluding that none of the sites investigated were found to be entirely suitable for ash disposal.
4.5 Project description
In Section 3 under ‘proposed site and project description’ the EIS provides background to the historical development of the site examining it in three areas, Area A, Area B and Area C and gives a list of historical licensing of activities. It also describes the current site in terms of same areas and a list of neighbouring land uses within the Asahi Business Park and other surrounding lands. Under the project proposal description it gives height and areas of the key structures of the proposal.
Under the CHP mode it states:
When operating in CHP mode the steam turbine would be capable of generating electrical power for export to the grid and providing a supply of processed steam to potential industries. Industries which require an economic source of steam for their processes typically include but are not confined to are petrochemical, news print manufacturing, tissue paper manufacturing, chemicals and plastics.
Ideally a steam user would be located at or immediately adjacent to the Asahi Business Park. The study identified the possibility to provide steam of sufficient quantity and quality (temperature and pressure) to satisfy the following industries:
• Pulp and paper manufacturers. • Pharmaceutical companies. • Bio-ethanol production plants. • Distillers. • Dairies.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 12 of 86 The study considered various operating scenarios and concluded that it is potentially feasible to extract steam at 10 bar at 200 c at flow rates ranging from 0-40 kg/s.
4.6 Fuels and materials management
Under the Fuels and Materials Management the EIS described the storage of the wood, removal of logs from delivery trucks by log grabbing equipment (or by mobile log grabbing plant), debarkering and chipping of woods, storage of woodchip in a fully enclosed portal frame steel structure (a height of 17.7 metres), limiting of noise limits to 80 dB(A) at 1 metre from the enclosure. Under the high biomass feed scenario the store could provide up to 5 days woodchip storage while the under low biomass feed scenario up to 8 days of storage would be available. The building would be fitted with a misting system that would be operated by the mobile plant operator to control concentrations of fine particles contaiend in the air. Reclamation of woodchips from the store would be conducted on a 24 hours a day through a push floor feeder and woodchip silos also known as search bunkers would be located adjacent to the boiler house. These silos would be fully enclosed circular sealed chambers.
The peat storage building would be fully enclosed portal frame steel structure to a height of 14.8 metres. Peat would be delivered in sod form and would provide up to five days peat storage. The EIS describes the reclamation from the peat store, peat silos and peat being fed into boiler in a similar process.
Coal would be unloaded through a hopper onto a conveyor which would accommodate a magnetic separator and be transferred to the coal storage building which would be 22 metres high and fully enclosed steel A-frame structure with an overhead shuttle conveyor. The store would accommodate 10,000 te of coal equating 57 days of coal storage when operating the high biomass feed scenario or 32 days of storage when operating the low biomass feed scenario. The building would be fitted with a misting system. Two coal silos are proposed each with 130 m 3 capacity.
A bunded oil storage tank would be cylindrical with a conical top approximately 6 metres in diameter and 8 metres in height. The start-up oil pumphouse would be located immediately adjacent to this oil storage tank and would be 10 metres high.
The primary limestone powder storage would be in the boiler house holding approximately 200,000 tonnes and equating to approximately 4-5 days storage. A pneumatic conveyor system would deliver the limestone powder into the boiler.
The primary sand storage would be the boiler house, holding approximately 200 tonnes and equating to approximately 30 to 60 days storage.
Under the process water management in paragraph 3.3 the EIS describes the actual power and steam generating process. Raw water would be abstracted
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 13 of 86 from Lough Conn reusing the facilities constructed by Asahi Limited now under the control of Mayo County Council. An existing reservoir on the Nobertune site might be used as a break tank or a separate facility might be constructed.
Following description of process water supply, cooling water system, boiler water system or polished processed water system, domestic potable supply, domestic effluent treatment system and other water uses, the EIS concludes that total process and domestic related water usage/discharge from the site would amount to approximately 114 m 3/per hour which is 31% of the licensed usage permitted to Asahi.
Under Ash Management the EIS describes the collection and transportation of furnace bottom ash (FBA) by trucks. Pulverised fly ash would be collected by bag filters and conveyed from the bag filter hoppers to 103 silos via an overhead pipeline and would be transported through trucks.
4.7 Planning Policy Context
Chapter 4 of the EIS relates to planning policy context and refers to National Spatial Strategy, National Development Plan, Regional Policy (Regional Planning Guidelines) for the West Region – 2004, Local Policy (Mayo County Development Plan 2003).
In paragraph 4.3 the EIS concludes that the proposed development of a combined heat and power plant fits in extremely well with the various planning and development policies at national, regional and local levels including:
• Use of indigenous fuels as a primary fuel source • Use of substantial element of renewable fuels. • Provision of an improved power supply in an area of power supply shortage. • Provision of an additional employment in an area of under-employment. • Increased competition within the Irish Electricity Generating Sector currently dominated by one player. • Mix of peat and biomass achievement. • Provision of a combined heat and power plant. • Assistance in the rolling out of windfarms. • Reduction in oil dependency. • Increase in the diversity of sources of power.
The EIS states that the proposal also accords with the specific policies of the Western Regional Plan and the Mayo County Development Plan to:
• Provide a reliable and consistent source of electricity. • Address infrastructural deficiencies in the region including energy. • Utilise native resources such as forestry.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 14 of 86 • Encourage the development of a combined heat and power plant. • Provide for growing electricity demand. • Utilise the possibility of biomass as an energy source. • Promote the area for major industrial investment through improved electricity supply, heat and power design of the plant and its location beside a major existing industrial plant.
4.8 Construction Activities
In Section 5 the EIS describes the construction activities, construction programme, construction compound and site access, material quantities, sourcing, transportation and storage, employment workforce facilities, construction traffic and parking, construction related noise and dust, health and safety, site management and security, environmental management during construction, construction waste management and disposal. In Section 5.17 the EIS describes the mitigation measures for construction activities including protection of surface water and groundwater, dust minimisation, visual impact, emergency preparedness, noise and vibration, waste management plan and site tidiness.
4.9 Roads and Traffic
Section 6 of the EIS describes the scope and the assumptions for the traffic impact assessment of the proposed development, the existing conditions in the study area in terms of land use, existing road network and existing traffic patterns, traffic generation of the proposed development and likely effects of the additional traffic generated by the proposed development on the surrounding network. It also describes the traffic impact during the construction. It also describes the traffic impact during the construction. In Section 6.7 mitigation measures are suggested to include:
• Improvements to the existing site access junction including a dedicated right turn pocket from the R314 into the development.
• A new access to the south of the development from Mullafarry Road.
• Improvements to the existing R314/Newtown White Road/Mullafarry Road junction. The proposed improvements would include altering the layout on the Mullafarry Road to introduce a staggered effect between Newtown White Road and Mullafarry Road.
4.10 Landscape and Visual
Chapter 7 of the EIS describes the landscape and visual assessment describing the assessment methodology, receiving environment, landscape and visual analysis. The former Asahi plant had already intruded on the agricultural landscape and the presence of overhead power lines which traverse the site had a significant impact on the landscape character. The EIS concludes that the existing brownfield industrial and agricultural landscape would be replaced by a complex which would be industrial in character. T he quality on
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 15 of 86 the environment would be altered and the development in overall terms would have moderate to neutral impact on the landscape character of the area.
The EIS provide photomontages from various viewpoints showing existing and computer generated final images. Mitigation measures are grouped under those during construction phase and during operational phase. The latter would include landscape maintenance plan and consistent treatment of site elements in order to provide a consistent design vocabulary.
4.11 Noise and Vibration
Section 8 of the EIS describes the methodology and assessments criteria. These include baseline noise survey of the site and assessment of noise criteria on the basis of the criteria referred to in the Environmental Protection Agency Guidelines. Noise emissions were assessed using a model.
Presently the overall noise environment could be described as quiet rural with only significant noise source due to road traffic on the main Killala – Ballina Road and to lesser extent on the local road to the south of the proposed site.
Section 8.4 of the EIS describes the noise and vibration characteristics of the proposed development with Section 8.5 providing evaluation of the noise and vibration impacts during the construction phase and during the operational phase. These are presented in noise contour maps.
The mitigation measures outlined in Section 8.7 of the EIS refer to selection of the equipment, sound containment, acoustic attenuators and noise screening to achieve the required design emission limits. The primary design noise criterion for the plant at night-time was 38dB(A). Overall it is concluded that the development is expected to have a slight noise impact at the nearest houses during daytime operations but that would be comfortably within the 55dB(A) EPA limit at all houses while for the night-time the noise emissions will be comfortably within the EPA night-time noise of 45dB(A).
4.12 Air Quality
Chapter 9 of the EIS describes the assessment methodology of air quality stating that emissions would arise from construction activities, road traffic and process emissions. Using various models and scenarios the EIS concluded 10 25 that predicted ground level concentrations of NO 2, SO 2, PM , PM and CO from the boiler sources.
The proposed development would be situated in an area defined as Zone D by the EPA i.e. a rural area and based on this data and pollutant concentrations recorded in the area the current air quality could be described as good. The EIS concludes that the proposed scheme would have slight impact on pollutant levels due to traffic generated by the proposed development and emissions from the on-site boiler but predicts that the air quality standards would not be exceeded.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 16 of 86 During the construction phase of the development there would be potential for dust to be blown from the site on the surrounding area and provides mitigation measures to minimise dispersion of dust from the site and monitoring during the construction phase at the nearest sensitive receivers.
In terms of process emissions the EIS compares predicted ground level concentrations of NO 2, SO 2, PM 10 , PM 25 and CO from the boiler source and compare them with the relevant limit values. These are presented in 9A.7. In terms of cumulative impacts the EIS states that once the power plant is 10 operational there will be NO 2and PM emissions generated from the traffic and the site activities concurrently and states that this would result in a slight adverse impact on the NO 2 but within the prescribed limits.
The EIS also examines the cumulative impact of the emissions both for Mayo Power Plant and the ESB power plant (Table 9A.10) and states that the results show the cumulative effect with both plants fully operational will result in continued compliance with the air quality standards.
The EIS prescribes a number of mitigation measures during the construction activities. Most of these relate to dust suppression measures. In terms of processed emissions the EIS states that the fly ash generated by the power plant could not be stored in an open air stack pile (as it would contain high concentrations of free lime (20%) a dust master would be used to process the fly ash into a dust free product to landfill requirements.
4.13 Climate
The methodology for the assessment refers to Kyoto protocol, EU Proposed Climate Agreement 2007, bio-energy Action Plan for Ireland 2007, Delivering Sustainable Energy for Ireland 2007, EU Emissions Trading Scheme and EU Transport Agreements. Examining the impacts of the development the EIS concludes that the proposed scheme would not cause a significant increase in traffic generated greenhouse emissions.
CO 2 would be omitted as a result of combustion of fuels. Its CO 2 emissions would be factored into Ireland’s overall EU commitment to limit increased in greenhouse emissions. It is estimated that the proposed development would emit approximately 0.58mt or the CO 2 per annum assuming the worst case scenario of a low biomass burn rate (25%) wood.
The EIS notes that when comparing CO 2 emissions at the proposed development with a typical peat powered fire station it would produce 25% less CO 2 noting that if biomass usage increases to 55%, the CO 2 emissions would match those from a 55% efficient new gas fired “combined cycle gas turbine” power station.
The EIS concludes that there would be no significant negative impact on the macro-climate or micro-climate as a result of the proposed development and suggests no mitigation measures.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 17 of 86 4.14 Terrestrial Flora and Fauna
No part of the site was within an area designated for conservation but the site was within 1 kilometre of Killala Bay a site of international conservation importance designated as a candidate Special Area of Conservation and a Special Protection Area. Also a proposed Natural Heritage Area Killala Esker lied less than 1 kilometres from the site.
Stating that the ecological interest within the site were low reflecting the current and past land uses the EIS states that all the existing habitats within the construction footprint would be lost and no measures would be required to compensate for the loss of habitats within the site owing to their low intrinsic value. Similarly no particular measures would be required for mammal species as a result of loss of hedgerows those these would be removed outside the bird nesting season in accordance with the Wildlife Acts. The EIS concluded that owing to the existing low ecological interest at the site and providing the mitigation measures as recommended are followed the impacts on the terrestrial ecology would be negligible or at most minor negative.
4.15 Aquatic Flora and Fauna
A large portion of Killala Bay was designated under EU Habitats Directive as a Special Area of Conservation and under the EU Directives as a Special Protection Area and under national legislation as a Natural Heritage Area. The bay and its associated habitats comprise an excellent range of good quality coastal habitats, including a number of listed on Annex 1 of the EU Habitats Directive.
The River Moy was one of the most important salmon fisheries in the north- west discharging into the southern end of Killala Bay. There were current discharges into Killala Bay including sewage treatment works in Enniscrone, County Sligo and the sewage treatment works in Killala Town. There were also a number of domestic sewage discharges in the bay from a number of sources.
The impact of the proposed development on the quality of the receiving waters of Killala Bay was evaluated using a numerical model of the Bay which predicted a minimal impact. The cumulative effect of the proposed discharge and the existing licensed ESB discharge would be imperceptibly different from the effect of the proposed discharge alone due to the extremely low discharge volume of the current ESB licence. The EIS concluded assuming the characteristics of the proposed discharge do not change significantly with time there will be no appreciable residual impact on the water quality of the receiving waters in Killala Bay.
4.16 Soils, Geology and Groundwater
Following description of the topography and stating that Ballina limestone formation underlied the site the EIS refers to eight springs in the area and four
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 18 of 86 bored wells and provisional aquifer classifications assigned to the bedrock formations underlying the proposed site by Geological Survey of Ireland.
The main pathways for contaminants from the existing site would be in surface water run-off to the north and south, shallow groundwater flow through the overburden and weathered rock and deeper groundwater flow through joints and other discontinued cracks in the bedrock. The main receptors of any existing contaminants would be the drainage ditches to the south-east and domestic wells located to the north and east of the site. The groundwater monitoring showed that several contaminants were elevated when compared to the relevant criteria. The potential impacts would be during the demolition and construction phase and operation of the power station. The EIS concluded that the proposed development would have an overall neutral long-term impact on soil and water quality and recommended mitigation measures both during the construction stage and during operation of the power station.
4.17 Site Services
In this section the EIS discuss utility services on the site that are to provided for the proposed developments including electricity used by the power station, security, communications, potable water supply, foul water drainage, processed water supply and management and surface quality drainage and attenuation. The EIS stated that the power station would use power generated at the site for its own plant and equipment.
4.18 Material Assets
Section 13 of the EIS discusses the fuel and material sources under material assets. It describes the anticipated tonnage of materials required under high biomass and low biomass scenarios. The EIS stresses that indigenous fuels such as peat and wood is plant for the proposed power station operations but for technical reasons a certain level of coal would be required to protect the boiler against attack by alkali and alkali metal species which naturally occur in peat and wood. A minimum level of 20% coal with typically 10% coal ash was recommended.
Wood would be sourced from forestry timbers including thinnings from Counties Mayo, Galway, Sligo, Roscommon, Leitrim and Clare. Peat would be sourced from licensed peatlands and bogs. Coal would be sourced from the world market while limestone would be locally sourced. No specific source of sand was identified but where possible would be sourced from within Ireland.
Wood delivery would be in two forms i.e. logs and woodchips, peat would be delivered in the form of sod. Coal particles would be maximum 50 millimetre in diameter consistent with international fuel deliveries to United Kingdom. No specific port has been identified to received shipments of coal however the likely port would be Sligo Harbour due to its relative proximity to the proposed power station site. A typical shipment quantity would be 3,500 tonnes delivered by a 10,000 tonne ship approximately two to three times per
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 19 of 86 month. Storage of coal at the port would be required prior to transfer by truck to the power station. If and where required ports receiving coal deliveries would be suitably licensed.
Limestone will be sourced in Mullafarry Quarry and delivered to the site in powder form via the southern entrance gate house.
Section 13.8 of the EIS outlines the potential impacts associated with fuels and materials in terms of source of the supply, traffic impacts and management on the site. The off-site mitigation measures would not be in the control of the power station but would include certain requirements and mitigation measures managed through contractual stipulations.
4.19 Waste Management
Section 14 of the EIS anticipates four streams of waste during the operation of the station. These would be ash, general municipal waste, hazardous and other classified waste, waste from fuels and material handling process.
Two streams of ash would be produced during the combustion of the power station furnace bottom ash and pulverised fly ash. Spent limestone would be present in the furnace bottom ash. The preferred option was to develop route by which these materials could be utilised through this would depend very much on the exact composition of the ash. There was sufficient evidence that several viable options for the utilisation of the material from land restoration, infill material, road building material to waste stabilisation was possible.
The alternative option was to send the ash to landfill.
4.20 Archaeology and Cultural Heritage
The field inspections did not highlight any features or areas of archaeological potential within the perimeter of the site. Five built heritage sites were noted including the ruins of a house, stone enclosing walls and a possible cobbled surface and these are proposed to be kept in-situ and excluded from the proposed power station construction and operation footprints by installation of fencing.
4.21 Human Beings
The population growth in north Mayo was below that experienced in the country. Similarly while employment levels had increased dramatically in Ireland north Mayo had experienced significant firm closures and redundancies over a number of years and it is stated to be located in an area where core employment sectors such as agriculture and manufacturing are weak.
The EIS maintains that the need for quality infrastructure investment has been recognised by numerous state agencies including the issue of secure supply of
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 20 of 86 power to be critical in the location of firms from foreign investment sectors. The proposed development would have addressed these.
4.22 Sustainability
The EIS identifies sustainable design construction as a key part of supporting more sustainable development overall. Minimising emissions impact, sourcing of materials locally, and using materials in their natural state as well as reuse of materials where feasible are identified. Waste arising from demolition and excavation for construction would be recycled where possible following the widely accepted hierarchy of waste management.
The largest proportion of energy was used during the operation of the buildings and was a priority in the design of the facility aimed to conserve the use of energy sources in the operation of the building including minimisation of CO 2 emissions.
4.23 Interaction and Cumulative Effects
The EIS states that these requirements have been addressed in a number of chapters of the main text in the EIS.
4.24 Adequacy of the EIS
Overall the EIS follows the headings provided in the EPA Guidelines and complies with the main requirements of the national legislation. The 1992 EPA Act empowers the EPA to publish Guidelines on the information to be contained in the Environmental Impact Assessments, and provides that where such guidelines have been published, those preparing and evaluating the EIS shall have regard to the Guidelines. The EIS as submitted following the format of the Guidelines is therefore legally adequate.
There is some information deficit in the EIS particularly in relation to materials input (in terms of availability during the lifetime of the plant in the amounts required and the likely significant impact arising from diversion of these to the proposed development) most of these issues have been raised in the detailed further information request and clarification of further information request by the Planning Authority.
I am satisfied that the applicants have provided sufficient information in relation to main alternatives considered, the reasons as to why they chose this type of facility.
Bearing in mind that this is a sub threshold development, and that the EIS provides a starting point for the EIA process, I consider the information provided as a whole to be adequate for the purposes of making a decision on this planning application.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 21 of 86 5. PLANNING AUTHORITY’S DECISION
5.1 Prior to making a decision the Planning Authority requested further information under 17 headings. The main points of these included:
1. Need for a power plant at the proposed location and clarification of whether the green paper on co-firing of biomass and peat refers only the existing ESB plants and not the creation of additional co-firing plants.
2. Indication if the applicant operates mixed fuel power plants in the UK and comparisons with other methods outlining reasons for choosing hybrid mechanically induced draught cooling tower (MID).
3. Suitability analysis of all non-exclusionary sites for ash disposal.
4. Environmental sustainability analysis of the proposed development in terms of carbon emissions, transportation by road of all materials, use of non-renewable fuels such as peat and coal and operation of the power plant at lower efficiency in the absence of outlets for the heat from the CHP (90% efficiency when generating steam, only 40% efficiency when not generating steam).
5. Reconciliation of the statements regarding labour force in various parts of the EIS.
6. Indication of the degree of improvements in dispersion as a result of raising of the stack from 50m to 70m.
7. Report on potential peat supply.
8. Evidence that suppliers can provide peat required for the low biomass scenario for the lifetime of the project.
9. Evidence that the amount of timber required can be provided during the lifetime of the project.
10. Confirmation that the proposed development would consume all the pulpwood supply and evidence that the pulpwood would not be required by Coillte.
11. Reconciliation of statements regarding debarking of trees.
12. Volume of timber harvesting losses in a typical scenario and impact on the proposed development.
13. Volume of sawlog and pallet timber downgraded to pulpwood in typical situations and its effects on timber availability for the power station.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 22 of 86 14. Report on the structural integrity of the discharge pipeline from the Asahi site to the outfall in Killala Bay.
15. Revised Aermod air dispersion model based on independent emissions data and source statistics.
16. Details of heavy metals arising from the process emissions.
17. Documentary evidence from the commission for the energy and regulation that the proposed power station is compatible with the commission’s strategy.
5.2 The response of the applicants to the Planning Authority refer to a number of points previously reiterated in the application letter and in the EIS. Some of the additional points include:
1. While the green paper did not refer to additional co-firing plants, the White Paper does refer to the need for greater security and diversity of feed stock supply and promotes co-firing in general. (Paragraph 3.3.4.).
2. Three power stations operated by the applicants in the UK are listed. The submission referred to the processes in the UK in the 1990s carried out by UK and the reviews by the Environment Agency on the effects of different power station cooling water system designs on the environment and particularly the effects of warm water discharges on the aquatic environment, and to the introduction of reduced plume or hybrid mid cooling towers in many power stations within the UK and maintain that this is still considered the best available technology by the Environment Agency. The response gave a list of advantages and provided comparative costings.
3. Letters of interest from Molloy Concrete and Watson Gough indicating their interest in purchasing all or part of the rock ash that would be produced at the site is submitted by the applicants. The response states that in the event of a requirement for ash deposits, they would refer to four sites previously identified (with ready access). The most favourite location at this stage was the previously consented and licensed ash pit constructed by B&M close to Bellacorick Station. This pit was only operational for 8 years of its 20 year design capacity and currently lied dormant.
4. In relation to carbon emissions and environmental sustainability of the proposed development, the response reiterated that the carbon generated as a result of transporting the materials to/from Mayo Power was part of the CO 2 that would be produced by the power station and would be negligible. Going through each of the materials the submission stated that the benefits achieved from CHP would outweigh the carbon emissions from transport of these fuel materials. In their view natural gas did not offer a viable economic alternative. They refer to abandoned plans to construct a 76 megawatt gas plant at
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 23 of 86 Bellacorick despite existence of full planning permission. The submission included some extracts from Irish Energy Policy document 1998, and provided comparisons with other powerstations, concluded that even without the capability of operating as a CHP plant the proposed development would produce lesser emissions than Bellacorick peat fired station, Moneypoint Power Station and compare favourably with West Offaly Peat Power Station.
5. The submission compared the catchment areas for workforce maintaining that it is proximate to labour force and population centre is a positive.
6. Increasing the chimney stack height by 20m from 50 to 70m would improve the dispersion by decreasing the ground level concentration of nitrogen dioxide by 210% and could be applied to all pollutants though no exceedences in the air quality standards where predicted to occur if the chimney stacks were to be 50m.
7.&8. The submission referred to a task force feasibility study sponsored by the Department of the Gaeltacht and the other 2001 by professor Caulfield, referring to its conclusion that there was sufficient peat from already developed bogs to supply a 30 megawatt peat only power plant for at least 20 years. It also referred to a survey by the professor in 2005 highlighting availability of c.8 million tonnes of peat concluded that these would ensure a project lifespan of a minimum 20 years without any contribution from independently owned bogs including Coillte. This submission also referred to support by former Bord na Mona workers to harvest peat.
9. In relation to requirement of evidence that Coillte and other timber suppliers could provide the amount of timber required for the high biomass scenario over the life of the power station, the response provided a list of suppliers indicating a total of 700,000 tonnes quantity wood chip / energy crop equivalent to calorific value of 1,100,000 tonnes.
10. In relation to requirement for assurances that Coillte would not require pulp wood for their own use, the response referred to the white paper committing to not less than 30% wood content in the midland peat fire stations by 2015. The capacity of the three midland stations together with Mayo Power would collectively require approximately 1.4,000,000 tonnes of woodchips or equivalent to supply 35% electricity from biomass. The submission stated that they have already received interest to supply 250,000 tonnes of wood/energy crops from Ireland (excluding Coillte) with the likelihood that the balance would either be imported and/or supplied from the pulpwood forest in the north-west. The position of Coillte was unclear as their primary objective was to support their operation of paper mills in Waterford which included transporting of 150,000 tonnes of pulpwood each year from the north-west. They conclude that in all probability the final
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 24 of 86 mix of biomass supply would be a function of price and availability with local feed stock suppliers enjoying a major advantage relative to transportation costs and access.
11. Stating that Mayo Power would receive logs whether debarked or not and apologising for the ambiguity in the EIS the submission stated that the plant was designed to utilise the bark together with the wood peat stocks and there would be no debarking on the site and there would be no bark entering the waste stream.
12. The response examines possible scenarios where volume of timber harvesting losses would occur concluding that this would be less than 5%.
13. Downgrading of pallet sized material to pulpwood and sawlog size material to pallet or pulpwood would be in the region of 20% and 30%. The impact of this downgrade on projected raw materials supplied for the 20 year period 2008-2027 was to increase available volumes for energy purposes from an estimated average value production of 280,000m 3 to an estimated 350,000m 3.
14. The submission referred to various meetings and advise by centre division of the Council that Mayo County Council intended to take over the pipeline and use it as a discharge line from their proposed effluent treatment plant and that the Council would be checking the integrity of the pipelines themselves.
15. The dispersion model considered the worst case scenario as identified in the European IPPC Bureau Document – reference document on “Best Available Techniques for Large Combustion Plants – 2005” for the size of plant and type of the fuel proposed at Mayo Power.
16. The submission listed the heavy metal emissions by coal, wood and peat stating that they would be lower than coal fired power stations in Ireland where bag filters are not used and that all plant and equipment would have to be designed to satisfy the requirements of best available technology in order to ensure the power station meets the stringent requirements dictated by IPPC legislation.
17. Referring the five principles stressed by the commissioner for energy and regulation namely security of supply, diversity of supply, location, increased competition and the need for additional generation in Ireland the applicants included a letter from the commission for energy regulation (copy attached).
5.3 The request for ‘clarification of further information’ by the Planning Authority referred to Items 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15 stating that these have not been fully answered. They also specifically asked to clarify how the proposed development would be in line with the government policy drawing attention to
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 25 of 86 inconsistencies of various figures and letters of interest from suppliers from Waterford, UK and USA.
The response of the applicants received by the planning authority on 8 th Nov, 2007 is quite detailed. I shall refer to these when necessary during my assessment.
5.4 The report for the Planning Authority referred to the relevant planning history and relevant sections of the Mayo County Development Plan 2003 and 2009. It also referred to various referrals and response from various sections of the County Council. Of the responses received:
Water Services – commented regarding the sea outfall, the need for a new foreshore licence by the developer, foul sewers, surface water and indicated several conditions to be imposed.
Road Design – had no objection to the development subject to a number of conditions.
Health and Safety Authority – stated that they do not advise against granting of permission.
North Western Regional Fisheries Board – requested a number of conditions to be attached. The submission also referred to comments by An Taisce regarding preparation of the EIS.
The report examined the proposed development under the substantive issues of transport and traffic, impact on residential amenity from noise and dust, impact on landscape and visual amenity, ecological impacts, groundwater and other issues highlighted the following points.
• There will be no alternative mode of transport available such as rail although using Ballina as a transhipment point would offer some reduction in road transport.
• There will be a considerable cost to a number of local authorities over the 20 year life of the plant as they will be required to maintain the road network impacted by the HGVs. Not only would the Mayo road network be affected but also Galway, Sligo, Roscommon, Clare and others though contribution to Mayo County Council towards cost of maintaining the road network would not provide funding for the maintenance of roads in other counties as there is no mechanism for the transfer of levied contributions between counties.
• Transfer of a large amount of fuel by road could have significant impacts upon residential areas and in particular towns and villages. The main haulage route for coal and wood would go through the town of Ballina but would not have significant impact upon residential areas of that town. The wood and peat transported from within Mayo will be dispersed across three different routes considerably reducing the overall impact.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 26 of 86
• The haulage routes are primarily along the regional road network which are suited to carrying all types of traffic including HGVs. Some minor improvements would be required to the county road such as passing bays, strengthening etc, which the developer should finance. The Council is satisfied that access to the power station site can be safely provided.
• The proposed power station would be over 250 metres from the nearest residence. Noise and dust emissions during the operations would be dealt with under IPPC Licence and noise and dust emissions during the construction phase could be dealt with by way of condition.
• The existing industrial complex at Ashai site has a moderate visual impact upon the wider area. The visual impact of the power station is likely to be slightly greater than the existing Ashai plant for a number of reasons including height, bulk and massing of the existing buildings compared with the proposed ones which are characterised by structures of significant height concentrated in a limited area and massing on a plateau.
• The landscape is already compromised by the Ashai plant buildings and may be further impacted upon by the recently permitted windfarm whose turbine height at 70m will be higher (boiler house at 50m) in the power station.
• There are no specially identified habitats within the curtilage of the power station site and there is no evidence to indicate that the proposed power plant would adversely impact upon designated areas along Killala Bay.
• Any risk of pollution arising from operation of the proposed development would fall within the remit of the IPPC Licence.
• Mayo County Council would be providing a municipal sewerage plant at the Ashai site and all effluent from this development should be treated at the Council’s sewage plant including non-domestic.
• Hours worked during the construction phase should be controlled by way of conditions.
• It is necessary to impose conditions in relation to timeframe for the decommissioning and removal of the proposed power plant.
The report for the Planning Authority states that the Senior Planner visited the combined heat and power plant using the same fuel mixture and similar technology in Vasteras, Sweden.
5.6 The Planning Authority decided to grant permission subject to a number of conditions grouping them under general, roads and traffic, drainage, landscaping, health and safety, monitoring, waste, decommissioning, financial.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 27 of 86 5.7 During the course of the application the Planning Authority received a number of 3 rd party submissions and observations some of whom are also appellants.
6. PLANNING HISTORY (According to planning authority documents)
P74/10 Permission granted for a synthetic fibre manufacturing plant (Asahi)
78/2176 Permission granted for a chemical store (Asahi Ltd)
00/648 Permission granted for change of use from warehouse to stores to production facilities, three silos, connection to public water, demolition of existing offices and reconstruction of offices (Schutz UK Ltd)
R1/660 Permission granted for an emergency electrical power generating plant (ESB)
00/1283 Permission granted for construct emergency electrical power generating and consisting of mobile power units (ESB)
R1/2789 Permission granted for 20 metre GSM support structure and antenna link (digifone)
PL16.221542 (06/2116) Permission granted for resumption of use of 52 mega watt electricity generating unit (R1/660) and development of an additional 52 mega watt electricity generation unit.
Also relevant but not at the site is for a 10 wind turbines and ancillary buildings including ESB sub station (Killala community wind farm) under 06/3439.
7. GROUNDS OF APPEAL
There are four appellants namely Killala Community Council, Michael O’Donnell, An Taisce, and Asahi Development Committee.
7.1 By Killala Community Council
The lengthy submission includes a number of appendices and comments on the Planning Authority report. The main points of the submission include:
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 28 of 86 1. Ash disposal- silos on the site could only store 5/14 days of ash. Alternative use while welcomed have not been fully developed. Additional traffic created by ash removal has not been examined
2. EIS - use of peat-coal-wood must be fully adhered to and the necessary conditions of the licence covering functional inputs processing and emissions must endorse the policy. If these fuels become unavailable use of other fuels must be subject to planning permission. In particular thermal oxidiser or incinerator would not be acceptable to the community under any circumstances. In view of the high transportation costs of peat, coal and wood the appellants question the viability of the project.
3. Under the heading of ‘questions as follows’ the grounds of appeal raises specific questions in relation to discharges and emissions including chemicals used for treatments and the type of mechanical devices to control emissions.
4. It also questions if there are plans to retro fit or convert the power station boiler to a thermal oxidiser or incinerator.
5. Traffic - In general traffic in surrounding towns would be a major problem as the imported coal would come to the site via Ballina and the peat would come via Crossmolina. In both cases the infrastructure are inadequate. Particular problem points will be at the Mullafarry junction R314, development access junction to R314 and new development access off Mullafarry Road.
6. Gas – The most preferred option for the community would be gas. The County Development Plan objective is to provide a gas powered station at north Mayo (extracts from draft Co. Mayo Development Plan are attached).
7. Heritage - Due consideration must be given to the rich and important historical and archaeological heritage of the area in establishing the plant and necessary landscaping must be provided to minimise the visual impact of the buildings. Permanent use of the temporary construction road was not included in the original planning application and the land in question was a subject of discussion between Mayo County Council and community regarding development of an amenity park.
8. Community development – the community have a history of industrial and social development stretching back over 50 years studied as model by various universities. While they appreciate the benefits that could accrue from the proposed development 80% of the community disagreed with the project.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 29 of 86 9. No reply from various authorities, they question why the matters were not pursued further in cases where no replies were received from various authorities in particular Coillte, Bord na Mona, Energy Commission and ESB.
Appendix F includes a copy of response from Irish peat land Conservation Council which states that the IPCC cannot support the above development as it would result in a destruction of peat and habitats. (The same has been submitted as observations to the appeal by the Irish Peatland Conservation Council)
7.2 By Michael O’Donnell
Stating that he believes this brown fill site with access to two 110 kV lines is an ideal location for a gas fired generating station it is stated by the appellant that a gas fired station would be consisted with the Mayo County Development Plan 2003 – 2009 (energy TI-E5) the other points include
• On the basis of the proximity principle if a peat and timber fire station was to be established it would be best located at Bellacorick.
• The site of the proposed development would give rise to a significant increase in HGV traffic on Mullafarry Road and Crossmolina Killala Road and on other roads and would result in a major road safety hazards.
• The promoters of the project have a strong and successful track record in electrical power generation in Europe and in the USA and they operate gas fired generation station at Taynagh, Co. Galway and he would like to see the applicants establish a gas fired station at the Asahi site to replace the ESB owned oil fire generators.
• He lives 400 metres from the site and is very much pro industry and pro development and is keen to welcome much needed investment into the county. Despite concerns about the project in terms of burning peat, coal, HGV traffic and ash he initially welcomed the project but following familiarisation with a subject matter and the key issues over the last nine months he has come to the conclusion that the review undertaken by Mayo County Council was inadequate and disagree completely with the decision to grant permission to the project in its current form.
• The submission by the appellant is quite long and includes a number of appendices, photographs, and map references. Further grounds of appeal are provided under the following headings:
Details of the steam host are presented.
The decision of the Planning Authority was made without having received authorisation from Commission for Energy or having required expert opinions of the ESB, Bord na Mona or Coillte.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 30 of 86 Mayo County Council gave inadequate consideration of the road safety hazards that would arise from resulting increase in HGV traffic.
Mayo County Council have failed to define clearly the HGV whole roads in the planning conditions set out in the planning permission.
Granting permission to construct a permanent road in the position shown on drawing GEN/DEV/1129A would seriously inhibit the development potential of these lands for playing pitches.
7.3 By An Taisce
The submission by An Taisce is presented under the following headings
1. Sustainability and greenhouse emissions – the proposal is unsustainable because of its primary reliance on peat and coal combustion. While the availability of peat for burning at the proposed development is uncertain they note that one of the consultants supporting the development has stated that up to 8 million tons of peat would be available for burning in the proposed development. In their view this has no tenable basis. The extraction processing and burning of peat is a major contributor per ton of CO2 emissions. Ireland is already extracting unsustainable levels of peat for energy production in the three existing power plants and when the National Climate Change Strategy Ireland 2000 was drawn up special provision was made to accommodate the continuation of these peat burning power plants while closing the other older and more inefficient peat burning plants including the one in Bellacorick.
The proposal for coal firing of the proposed plant up to 35% coal is equally unsustainable on climate and emissions impact. (The submission refers to increase in the level of CO2 emissions as a result of decision to abandon the objective in the 2000 Climate Strategy to phase out coal burning at Money Point in favour of natural gas). Although tonnage in emissions of coal burning proposed by the current facility represents a relatively small percentage of that of Money Point the principle of developing any additional coal burning facility in Ireland is considered untenable.
2. Proposed development is in contravention of the overriding government policy for 3% annual reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. An Bord Pleanala is required to have regard to this government policy.
3. The proposed development is in contravention of the 2007 government White Paper “delivering a sustainable energy future for Ireland entirely as a provisional White Paper is to reduce fossil fuel dependence and to increase renewable energy generation to 30% by 2020, 10% in excess
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 31 of 86 of the EU target.” There is no provision for additional peat and coal combustion.
4. The proposed development is in contravention of National Climate Strategy 2007 – 2012 – while the Strategy proposes more efficient energy generation for combined heat and power and co-firing with biomass for power generation, no provision is being made for additional peat or coal fuelled power generation in Ireland. Only the three existing Bord na Mona peat stations are included in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme.
5. The information contained in the EIS and further information and clarification provided by the applicant is deficient and in breach of article five of the EIA Directive on the information to be provided by the developer including the description of the project. This means the direct and indirect effects of the project cannot be properly assessed in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 of the Directive in particular
Greenhouse gasses - section 9B of the EIS fails to provide any figures for greenhouse emissions generated by the extraction transport of peat to the site and burning of peat, trans boundary greenhouse gasses generated by the extraction of coal, transport of coal to the site and burning of coal.
Peat supply – the applicants have failed to identify a legally sourceable deposits of peat supply to the level projected and to provide the tonnage of peat required to meet the applicants proposed objectives. Major part of Mayo’s blanket bogs have been designated as special areas of conservations in the Habitats Directive and other areas not currently designated are priority habitats and will require protection though through extended designation. The peat supply potential identified by the applicants up to levels of 8 million tons have not been substantiated. EIS provides no evaluation of the ecological impact of the level of peat extraction.
The applicants have failed to substantiate information on available timber supply from Coillte or other sources. Coillte production capacities directed towards supplying the Masonite Plant in Carrick-on-Shannon and transportation by rail of timber from the north-west including Co. Mayo to the Smart ply Europe pulpwood and plywood plant at Waterford Co. Kilkenny. Information to establish availability of timber of the capacity provided given competing demand from other sources including saw mills has not been substantiated.
Ash disposal – the proposal is deficient in addressing the location and impact of residual ash disposal generated by the proposed development even if commercial processes for reuse is achieved.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 32 of 86
The proposed development would generate serious transport impacts for peat, timber and import of coal. While the Asahi factory was integrated with the national rail system the line from Killala to Ballina has now been removed and the site is entirely dependant on road transport extent and impact of which has not been addressed or resolved.
Considering the range of information deficiencies identified by the council’s professional advisors in their request for further information the decision notification is inexplicable and not based on any transparent planning or environmental evaluation. As such the decision constitutes a systematic abrogation of Mayo County Council’s responsibilities as a consent authority under the EIA Directive.
6. Failure to identify CHP use of proposal - the proposal is presented as a CHP project designed to capture and use surplus heat generated. In other EU countries the heat is used to heat hospitals residential areas industrial processes or greenhouses in proximity to CHP plants. The applicants have failed to provide for any identified industrial use of the CHP capacity. While there is clear potential of CHP plant being linked to a new industrial facility this would require an EIA.
7. Lack of justification for development with regard to any sustainable energy strategy for north-west Connaught.-
• Wind based energy project on the former Bellacorick peatland extraction site providing generating capacity of up to 290 mega watt is in excess of the grid capacity to accommodate renewable energy development of the scale and requires upgrading.
• There is a current planning application in Mayo County Council for development of a 100 mega watt open cycle gas turbine power station at Claremore’s linked to north-west Mayo to Craughwell Galway gas pipeline. Mayo is among the greatest areas for potential of any area in Europe for wave and tide generation because of the level of tidal surge.
• The most sustainable use for timber as a fuel is the appropriate carbon neutral use of timber and other biomass there is a particular need in Mayo for alternatives to gas and oil central heating in houses and biomass from sustainable sources would be appropriate fuel replacing these.
8. The proposal is unrelated and unintegrated with any sustainable energy production and consumption strategy in either Mayo or north-west Connaught.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 33 of 86 The submission concludes that the lack of availability of peat and wood for burning the adverse impact on the EU emissions trading coast resulting from burning coal render this project unsustainable on every count. It could also lead to proposals for redesign as a waste incinerator. The existing peaking plant adjacent to the site can act instead as a backup to meet supply variation for the appropriately located wind and other renewable energy development which the region is capable of achieving.
7.4 By Asahi Development Committee
The submission by the consultants for the appellants is particularly long and includes copies of a survey carried out by the committee amongst the local population.
Stating that the appellants represent a considerable number of people from Killala and surrounding area and that they accept and encourage location of appropriate and sustainable development at the site and the surrounding area, and that the proposed development was initially supported widely by the committee; it is submitted that following examination of the information submitted and receipt of a detailed assessment of the proposal from suitably qualified engineering planning and environmental consultants, and consideration of the additional submissions the Commitee was disappointed by the conditions attached to the decision to grant permission.
The results of the survey to the statement “this project is very welcomed development in Killala area” 363 respondents disagreed while 40 agreed, 30 offered no opinion.
This survey carried out following decision of the Planning Authority was a strong mandate for refusal of permission.
The respondent had identified a number of concerns regarding the proposed development and its likely negative impacts such as pollution, traffic, health and safety, trojan horse for waste incinerator, tourism in the area, noise, flora and fauna, property devaluation, viability of the proposed amenity park and possible future extensions to operations.
Stating that there are a number of micro as well as macro or regional national policy issues that arise in respect of the proposal, the grounds of appeal highlights the following
1. Concerns regarding ancillary/additional developments- Te proposal is for a larger and more intensive development. The application documentation indicate large amount of space that is not accounted for in details.
2. Concerns regarding the location and availability of fuel supplies- the information contained in the application documentation is unacceptably vague with two possible scenarios presented.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 34 of 86 • Given the implications in terms of traffic, range of processes involved, and range of pollutants produced specific information is required. In particular the appellants have increasing concerns regarding the feasibility of the development and indeed the environmental sustainability of development.
• It concludes that there is simply not enough information on the proposed fuel sources (peat, wood, coal) regarding the precise location, source, availability of the potential fuel that is to be used to fuel the power station to properly evaluate the proposal. It is also stressed that the application simply identifies a port of importation and gives no indication as to the origin of or availability of the potential fuel.
3. Concerns regarding environmental unsustainability of the proposal-
• Peat bogs of Ireland are a precious resource as a habitat and as a carbon sink and wood burning has a significant environmental questions regarding pollution.
• Coal while in existence in locations outside Ireland represents locked up carbon which is released when used in the manner presented in the proposal and as such contributes to global warming.
• The proposed development does not properly explain where the ash would be disposed of and there is little firm arrangements regarding inspirational information attached to the application.
• They maintain that the proposal is environmentally unsustainable and contrary to international and government policies on the issue.
4. The appellants support location of a gas fired power plant at the site. I n their view the current proposal to construct a peat, wood and coal fired power station will squander the advantages that the subject site has to offer in the context of a gas connection and utilisation in the future.
5. Contravention of County Development Plan and draft County Development Plan. The proposed development would contravene the specific commitment in the draft plan to facilitating the provision of gas facilities at this location.
6. Inadequacy of the Environmental Impact Assessment – the appellants are disappointed by the lack of precise information contained in the EIS in particular regarding site selection section and the proposal section.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 35 of 86 7. Traffic concerns - having regard to the actual truck traffic that will be associated with the proposed development as many of the identifiable whole routes are inadequate in particular R314 is unsatisfactory and is not capable of facilitating the traffic associated with the development, Mullafarry Road is already heavily trafficked with quarry trucks and is not capable of taking additional traffic. The proposed development is premature pending the construction of Crossmolina bypass. HGV traffic through Killala town is now creating difficulties.
8. Environmental concerns/risk of pollution – the proposed development is located in close proximity to Killala Bay designated as a CNSBA and to River Moy an important river and to Killala a proposed NHA.
9. Concerns regarding impact on tourism.- It is fact that even the perceptions of the proposed development would be enough to undermine the potentially important sector.
10. Legal basis for discharge arrangements- They are emerging significant legal questions regarding the current development linking to the ESB discharge and arrangements arising.
11. Impact on employment- The appellants feel that the actual number of posts proposed would not justify in itself what is otherwise an unacceptable proposal.
8. 1ST PARTY RESPONSE TO GROUNDS OF APPEAL
8.1 The response of the 1 st party submitted by a Planning Consultant is quite lengthy and includes some appendices. Following a brief description of the site, planning history, and existing uses it is stated that the vacant industrial buildings are very substantial at the Asahi Business Park and this was one of the reasons for the decision to locate this project here.
The submission concludes:
• The essential logic of the proposal is that it will utilise largely native and local fuels-peat and renewable - to generate electricity in an area with poor supply. • The proposal will not only improve supply in the area but will also contribute to government efforts to reduce Ireland’s dependency on imported fossil fuels. • The proposal is also a combined heat and power plant. Steam from the process will be made available to industrial users who can utilise the adjoining Asahi site where existing industrial infrastructure is available. • The proposal will bring extra jobs benefit to a region that has suffered heavy depopulation and unemployment and also allow the reutilisation of one of the countries largest industrial brown fill sites.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 36 of 86 The response of the Planning Consultants to the appeal is divided into two parts. The 1 st part deals with the appeal by An Taisce while the second part combines the three other appeals together stating that they raise generally similar issues. The main points include:
8.2 In Response to An Taisce Appeal
1. Climate change issues and sustainable energy.
• The proposed development is leading in the field of being a state of the art generating facility with a major reliance on renewables that will meet all European and Irish environmental standards.
• Whilst government policies seeking to reduce Ireland’s carbon emissions this does not include a policy to cease using either peat or coal.
• The proposed power station must get an IPPC license as well as a permit for greenhouse gas emissions
• In order to achieve such a license the developers will need to satisfy government requirements with regard to carbon emissions and as such the issue will be dealt with in a planned manner.
• The proposed mixed fuel feed of biomass, peat and coal presents an alternative to the significant national reliance on natural gas and other imported fossil fuels.
• The proposal supports the objective of the government White Paper in achieving a diversity of supply. The White Paper states “the government remains committed to reducing over reliance on natural gas in the power generation section by proactively pursuing all realistic alternatives”
• One of the key objectives of the proposal is provision of a dispatchable and reliable load of 100 mega watt installed capacity to the grid which in turn will allow the development of wind energy in the region which otherwise would be restricted by the current inadequacy of the transmission system. Therefore the plant is supporting the governments policy of increasing energy generation from renewable resources.
• Mayo power proposes to use biomass as a major feed stock for the plant which will make up 25% – 40% of the fuel subject to availability. As such it will directly utilise renewable resources as well.
• The project promotes the objective of the government White Paper in many areas namely security of supply, diversity of supply, use of
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 37 of 86 coal, co firing, biomass, flexible generation, renewables, combined heat and power, increase competition, the need for new power plants (these were provided in the clarification of further information).
• The impact of the proposal in terms of greenhouse gas emissions has been detailed in chapter nine of the EIS submitted for the scheme and the applicants are aware of the fact that they will need to operate within the carbon dioxide emissions trading scheme.
• The proposed CHP plant which would achieve 80% efficiency rather than 30-40%, and as such would reduce carbon footprint. The EPA has recently increased the annual carbon allowance set aside for a new CHP entrance from 450,000 tons to 750,000 tons.
• Burning of peat is nothing new or unusual in Ireland or the EU. It is a major fuel used with EU approval both in Sweden and Finland. Certain bog lands in Mayo have already been developed and some of these are not exhausted.
• Use of coal is very much a part of national energy policy as noted in statements in the recent White Paper “coal is in very long world supply and is not correlated to oil or gas supplies in price or supply sources. Hence its renewed attraction is a contributor to fuel supply diversity and security” (section 3.4.3) and “co firing of biomass with peat and other fossil fuels (i.e. coal) offers identified potential and the government is fully supportive of its development” (section 3.4.4).
• Weather on the Atlantic coast is very variable. This inconsistency caused stocking problems for Bord na Mona over the years of operation in the north-west Mayo bogs.
• Technically coal assists in the burning process. The inclusion of a proportion of coal will substantially reduce the problems experienced both in Lanesborough and Shannon Bridge peat fired plants due to corrosion
2. Compliance with EIA Directive
• EIS was prepared in accordance with the Irish regulations and had regard to Guideline documents. All likely significant impacts were assessed and addressed in an iterative process with significant level of consultation and advice from statutory and other consultees to ensure the broadest scope of concerns were addressed.
• The proposal and the assessment of the impacts was also based on emission limit values and best available technique.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 38 of 86 • The proposed development is a “sub threshold” development. EIS is required for thermal power stations with a heat output exceeding 300 mega watts. Therefore an EIS for the proposed development was not mandatory.
• The subject of greenhouse gasses has been dealt with extensively in section 9B of the EIS.
• The proposed development is largely based on native fuels and has advantage over other thermal power stations which rely wholly on imported fuels.
• Traffic generated greenhouse gas emissions as a result of the proposed development will not be significant (section 9B.5.1)
• Extensive information on the availability of peat in the area has been submitted with further information items 7 and 8 and clarification of further information clearly demonstrating that in excess of 20 years of supply of peat is available to the power station from bogs that are already developed and are not subject to any conservation designations. The majority of the information re availability of peat is an extract from the consultancy study by Bord na Mona.
• This is not a planning application for peat extraction any more than a housing application is a planning application for manufacture of concrete blocks.
• Detailed information has been provided in relation to timber supply in particular in appendix A13 of the EIS and in the further information and clarification. It has been demonstrated strong local interest in providing potential sources of timber and other biofuels. They are confident that should the power plant be permitted as such would be available.
• Disposal of ash has been dealt with elsewhere.
• The transport issues arising from the proposal are that within section six of the EIS. Asahi factory at Killala was never integrated with the rail network. Chemicals were transported by rail to Ballina and then transferred to road vehicles for delivery to the factory.
3. Combined heat and power
• A major advantage in sustainable and high efficiency power generation is the potential to use renewable fuels with a low carbon footprint in the most energy efficient manner i.e. CHP configuration. This can lead to other beneficial synergies within higher community and national benefits.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 39 of 86 • The proposed thermal output from the proposal would amount to a minimum of 36 tons of steam at 10 bar every hour. This quantity of steam is of particular importance to certain sectoral users which otherwise could not be attracted to such a location. Modern high steam usage enterprises are found in the commodity food industry, renewable fuel production (pallets and bracketing) timber products and other evaporative and drying technologies.
• Many of these high thermal energy input industries produce volume products and are also depended on a good water supply power and sufficient assimilative capacity for treated effluent. Locations that can provide all four of these requirements are quite rare and the absence of any one factor greatly reduces or eliminates the viability of many sites.
• Addition of a power industry that can add two of those elements to the existing available water supply and effluent outfall with large scale assimilative capacity is a major enhancement to the marketability of the adjacent sites for such purposes.
• Consistency of the supply and the long term viability of the outputs are of particular relevance in attracting synergetic investment. It is not possible to have such industries located in advance of the site as power and steam must be available or at least under construction to provide the necessary marketing assurances.
• The availability of this combination of four key facilities has the added benefit of rendering viable projects which could not otherwise be considered.
8.3 In Response to Appeals from Killala Community Council, Michael O’Donnell and Asahi Development Committee
1. Ash disposal policy
• The preferred option of Mayo Power Ltd is to utilise the ash generated by the process as is the case in the CHP plant in Vasteras, Sweden. The applicants have entered into discussions with a number of local contractors who have expressed an interest in utilising both the ferns bottom ash and the finer fly ash generated by the power plant.
• Based on the proven experience of operators who are successfully utilising all of the ash produced by their power plants, the interest of local contractors in utilising the ash from the power project and the overall sustainability of the proposal the applicants are confident and keen to pursue the utilisation of ash option in accordance with the requirement of the EPA in licensing the facility. This approach also accords with current development
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 40 of 86 policy on waste which seeks to reduce, reuse and recycle rather than landfill.
2. Outfall pipeline
• The proposed project will be only one of a number of users of the outfall pipeline which will remain in the ownership of Nobertune,the owners of the Asahi site.
• The primary use of the outfall would be disposal of the clean surface water and cooling water with a minimum input of treated domestic sewage. All the discharges would be subject to IPPC controlled by the EPA.
• It is noted that the Council was interested because they too wished to use the pipeline for the discharge of treated sewage from a new plant in Killala town. The pipeline will not be Mayo Power Ltd asset or under their functional control.
• Monitoring point for the power plant’s effluents will be at the site boundary prior to entry to the pipeline and prior to a mixture with any other licence effluent (they repeat that the appropriate authority for the submission is EPA).
3. Fuel mix
• The site is already used as a power station with the presence of the ESB peaking plant and the support of the community for the idea of a power station into site is noted.
• Therefore while the only matter at issue seams to be the fuel. The appellants preference for gas is noted but possible.
• RWE Consultants on the design of the proposed power station are of the opinion that a mixed fuel CHP plant is the best option for the site. “ A mixed fuel power plant endorses a number of strategic objectives which government is seeking in the future, including the increased use of biomass fuels, the need to increase Irelands security of supply and the need to raise Irelands CHP plant portfolio to name but a few”.
Further points quoting the consultants include
• There is no fuel gas available in Mayo at this moment in time where there is significant objections to Corrib gas pipeline. The consultants would not consider developing a gas fired power plant at any location where there is not a secure source of fuel gas available
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 41 of 86 • They refer to withdrawal of a planning application for the development of an open cycle gas turbine peeking plant at Claremorris Co. Mayo
• Based on the information contained within Shell’s website it will be some considerable time before gas will be available to industry in Mayo. • Due to economies of scale, calculations and indeed those of the Irish Authorities a gas fired plant would need to be at this 400 mega watt in capacity in order to be economically feasible and compete successfully in the new all Ireland market as a mid merit power plant. (they note Rolls Royce Power Ventures chose not to renew their planning permission for the construction of a 701 mega watt gas fired power plant at Bellacorrick).
• A significant and primary consideration in determining the size of a power plant is the capacity of the local electrical grid in Mayo which simply has insufficient capacity to support a 400 mega watt power plant. They are however confident as endorsed by Eirgrid and CER that the grid can support and should benefit from the proposed flexible 100 mega watt merit mixed fuel CHP plant.
• While lack of secure gas supply renders the Asahi Business Park totally unsuitable for a gas fired power plant it offers a unique opportunity for the construction of a mixed fuel CHP plant with the main attraction being that its an existing brown field industrial site with a capacity and infrastructure to accommodate both the power plant and the other industries which can comfortably cohabit the site and benefit from the sources of steam/heat/electricity which will be available.
• Alternative sites were considered particular the site of former ESB Bellacorrick power station, but it was found that the site has no infrastructure to support a CHP development and also it was considered distant from population centres and potential employees and therefore much less likely to be attractive to other businesses and industries.
• The proposed mixed fill CHP plant offers security of supply in which some 80% of the fuel mix will be sourced from indigenous supplies at controllable prices, unlike the imported gas which can be extremely volatile.
• The proposed development would also mean peat farmers would be able to return to work and new opportunities would be created for the forestry sector and for the farming for energy crops. A gas fired power plant will not be able to deliver these benefits or opportunities.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 42 of 86 • The RWE (Consultants) has carried out significant due diligence appraisals of the similar peat/wood/coal CHP power plants in Finland and Sweden where such plants have been operating successfully for many years and indeed continue to be built in direct competition with gas fired power plants. They consider the indigenous peat reserves in Mayo offer all the same advantages not least the security of fuel supply. The consultants support the Governments strategic objective to increase the number biomass burning power plants in Ireland.
• The proposed development will assist in achieving Government’s objective of reducing reliance on gas.
• They note the site is used for electricity generation through the oil powered ESB peeking plant permitted by An Bord Pleanala (PL16.221542) which is obviously 100% reliant on fossil fuel and imported fuel. The proposed development represents an opportunity for improvement over the permitted scheme in terms of reliance on native fuel and would be more efficient than the existing ESB peeking plant.
4. Traffic
• The 1 st party submission summarises the key points of the Traffic Impact Assessment and in particular
• The site was formally the Asahi Manufacturing Complex and has the benefit of an existing high quality access and opens onto a high quality regional road. The traffic counts collected indicates that an average 24 hour flow of about 3,400 PCUS or 3,200 vehicles.
• Under the worst case scenario assessed the proposed development would generate 216 HGVs and 102 LGV/car trips per day.
• Two thirds of the traffic would travel to south to Ballina the remaining 1/3 will travel to north to and from Killala which would translate an additional peek hour flow of 28 passenger units per hour (south) and 14 (north) along R319.
• The ratio flow to capacity (RFC) is less than 0.02 which is well below the normal acceptable threshold of 0.85.
• As per condition no. 10 closing of Mullafarry Road entrance the R314 junction will handle mole traffic however the additional 20 PCUs on this access will not have any noticeable impact on the performance of this junction.
• The traffic impact on Ballina Town at the highest level is 2.3% increase in traffic i.e. less than half the normal threshold of 5%.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 43 of 86 • Immanent completion of route linking N59 and R314 via Bearnaderg inner relief road would mean HGV traffic to/from the direction of Crossmolina could actually bypass Ballina Town Centre. This would further reduce the impact.
In terms of specific concerns the 1 st party response include
• R314 capacity - could easily accommodate up to 13,000 vehicles per day. The development trip generation of 318 vehicles per day will not increase the existing average daily traffic of 3,200 vehicles per day to a level anywhere near this 13,000 threshold.
• Mullafarry Road – the applicants are agreeable to condition no. 10 which requires closure of road entrance from the site to Mullafarry Road. This would mean the existing quarry would be the only HGV traffic generator on this road. Wood deliveries initially routed via this entrance will now use the main access on the R314. They also note the condition no. 8 requiring setback of the fence line along the boundary to provide three passing bays. Also the applicants own proposal to improve the layout of R314/ Mullafarry Road junction will improve the traffic safety along this corridor.
• Possible impacts on other local roads – access to the site will be only via R314 which would make access via other local roads less attractive. The applicant is amenable to restricting whole roads to and from the site only where R314 (accept delivery of limestone from Mullafarry quarry). Condition no. 6 requiring road and bridge surveys before and after construction will allow a stringent monitoring of the potential impact of the development traffic particularly HGV on the condition of the Local Road Network and together with condition 10 will have control and mitigate against significant impacts on the local road network.
• Impact on Ballina Town Centre - they understand the inner relief road will be completed this year which will offer a new route linking N59 from Crossmolina and R314 which will reduce the proposed developments impact on the town centre. In any event as indicated in the EIS the potential traffic increase at the Ballina Town Centre junctions is less than 5% threshold required to make a noticeable impact on existing conditions.
• Impact on Killala Town Centre – while during the EIS preparation potential peat sites were identified along the northern coast road that could have necessitated traffic going via Ballycastle and Killala (and leading to an assumption of worst case scenario of 4 HGVs per hour in each direction). Further investigations on material sources and delivery routes have identified that the majority of peat will be sourced in general area of Bellacorrick and
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 44 of 86 Bangor Erris. The traffic from these will travel via N59 and therefore not pass through Killala.
• Traffic hazards – Stage One Road Safety audit (RSA) was done as part of EIS which recommended modifications necessary to improve safety though overall the layout was found to be adequate measures the improved visibility and signage would need to be incorporated to the design. It is intended that stage two RSA will be undertaken prior to construction and stage three RSA audit after the completion. No further mitigation measures would be required.
5. Incinerators/thermal oxidiser
It is not and has never been the intent of Mayo Power Ltd to develop an incinerator at this site. The CFB boiler design as approved by Mayo County Council is not suitable for the combustion of waste material (copy of letter to Michael O’Donnell attached).
• The applicants will be required to strictly adhere to the terms of the planning permission as well as the licensing requirements dictated by the EPA and other regulatory bodies and it is not open to developer to operate the plant as an incinerator without obtaining a new planning permission.
• Any attempt to convert a power station from combustion of peat/ biomass/ coal to incineration would constitute a change of use and would require a grant of permission. They refer to decision of the Board on a referral (19.RL2032) Edenderry power station.
6. Heritage archaeological report
A heritage archaeological report has been included in the EIS which notes that all heritage features of value identified adjacent to the proposal are avoided and will not be effected. Proposed development is located on the former Asahi site which has been previously disturbed. Supporting infrastructure including car parking and log storage is proposed on immediately adjacent lands not previously developed and these lands have also been assessed. While potential to encounter previously unrecorded deposits exist archaeological testing is proposed as part of the development proposal and conditioned by Mayo County Council to mitigate its potential impact.
7. Proposed amenity park
Development of some lands at Asahi as Community Park was not raised during the meetings with Council Officers and meetings with local community during scoping exercise. The lands concerned are the property of Mayo County Council and the application was made with their consent as land owner. They understand the council obtained these lands for the purposes of industrial development associated with Asahi site and not for community sports of leisure development. Even
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 45 of 86 if these amenity proposals are to be developed at the Asahi site the power plant proposal would only effect a small area of the lands that the community are seeking for extensive amenity works and the proposal would not be limiting the provision of suitable amenity facilities for the area.
8. Location
With regard to the suitability of the location for a peat fired power station and the appellants preference for Bellacorrick they refer to the EIS section 2.4.1.2 in site analysis and repeat a summary of the findings.
They outline the advantages of the site for proposed development under 12 points and also disadvantages of the other site
• no other industrial users, • existing infrastructure or facilities, • unpopulated bog land area with no available work force, • sensitive landscape).
The ESB station at Bellacorrick was located at one of the working bogs and beside supply of peat and used no other fuel, which a certain logic. This is no longer the case as the boglands around Bellacorrick are almost exhausted
They reiterate that one of the particular merits of the Asahi site is the reuse of a brown fill site. They note EPA document on the reuse of brown fill sites and the EU world initiatives and programmes that aim at encouraging use of existing brown fill sites and maximisation of existing infrastructure in preference to green field sites.
9. The 10 specific questions in section three of KKC (Killala Community Council) appeal.
These questions were raised some time ago and answered clearly and unambiguously (appendix E).
10. Petition
Local opposition in the region of 80% is not accurate. There is strong support from groups such as the former peat workers and former employees in the Bellacorrick station. They note most of the submissions to the application were supportive. Many of the concerns and fears such the issue of incineration do not relate to the development as proposed.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 46 of 86 11. Adequacy of Mayo County Council’s Assessment
The application was subject to a number of pre planning meetings, an EIS submitted at the request of the Planning Authority despite being sub threshold development and further information request and refers to statutory bodies. At the Council’s request the company facilitated a visit to the Swedish power station as was there as. They refer to 43 conditions and the requirement to a license from the EPA. In their view the application was thoroughly assessed
12. Sustainable Energy Strategy for North Connaught
They are not sure which strategy/policy/plan appellants are referring to section 4.2.2 of the EIS which revises extensive detail on County and regional policy, specifically the regional planning guidelines for the west region adopted on May 2004. They also note absence of any objection from the western region authority and the expressed support for the development from the Council for the west and IDA Ireland West Regional Office.
13. Approval of CER etc
Approval from the CER is currently being sought but will not be given in advance of planning permission. The CER is however highly supportive of the general approach being taken by Mayo Power and the letter to this effect is attached (23 rd July 2007 appendix F) and commands favourably on the proposal with regard to government policy on security of energy supply, diversification away from countries excessive dependency on natural gas, provisional of capacity in an area where infrastructure is week, increase competition in electricity generation industry, contribution to the expected requirement for additional generation capacity and that it accords with the policy to promote co firing with biomass.
They also refer to a more recent communication from CER (appendix G) in which Eirgrid confirm that there are some benefits to connecting a thermal plant in the north-west for the transmission system particularly in north-west where there is limited thermal generating capacity but has seen a significant increase in the level of wind generation. A thermal plant could be used off set the natural variability of wind.
14. Environment
The site is an existing industrial site and not subject to any designations. The project will be exclusively subject to emission controls on their IPPC licensing and the EIS has clearly demonstrated that this proposal will not impact adversely on the receiving environment and that no likely or significant impacts can or will arise.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 47 of 86
15. Tourism
Mayo is a most attractive country with some wonderful tourist facilities and significant tourist industry. The proposal located on a brown fill site in an established industrial area will not impact on tourism in the county or in the vicinity. Demolition of derelict structures previously associated with the site has already lead to some improvements.
16. Discharge arrangements
The point is not understood.
17. Employment.
The development will give rise to 300 jobs during construction and 60 long term jobs during its operation. There will also have major knock on effects with the related to employment generated out of the CHP aspect of the development, result in encouragement of associated energy intensive industry and from follow on service and related employment in the community. While they acknowledge that employment generation itself is not sufficient to justify the development they refer to their previous arguments in relation to these.
18. Dumping on site
One of the advantages of the project was that it involved the reuse of a brown fill site. Alleged dumping in the past was investigated both by Asahi and EPA with conclusion of no bleaching and no toxicity.
8.4 Conclusion
In their conclusion the consultants for the applicants state that the proposal is a modern state of the art electricity generating facility which will offer a unique opportunity for attracting other industries which would require steam for their processes. It would be located in a part of the country where power supply is poor and unlike most Irish power stations it would utilise a major element of renewable fuels and a majority element of native fuels. In their view the proposed development has many intrinsic advantages and accords closely with the government policy and has received support from CER and will fit into their programme for electricity generation in the country.
They refer to development at a brown fill site, availability of excellent water supply, road access, existing grid connection etc and replacement of the existing inefficient oil burning peeking plant on the site. In their view the suggestion that a gas fired plant would be preferable on this site is entirely unsustainable as the site could not support a viable gas fire station of the necessary capacity because of inadequate grid connection and that such a decision would not support government to reduce dependency on gas for
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 48 of 86 electricity generation. While they understand the local concerns, they state that these are inaccurate and unfounded and that the proposal is not an incinerator and cannot be used as such under the terms of the planning application.
9. OBSERVATIONS
There are six observations to this appeal. Some of these are by existing appellants providing observations on the grounds of appeal of other appellants.
9.1 By Irish peat land conservation council
While this is addressed to the An Bord Pleanala directly the contents are very similar to those addressed to Planning Authority (and was enclosed by one of the appellants as appendix). The main points include
• They cannot support the proposed development as it would result in the destruction of peat land habitats Mayo and in its surrounding counties.
• While they welcome development of a biomass fuel power station they are opposed to generation of electricity using peat burning methods which is a significant contributor to Irelands CO 2 emissions and contributes negatively to global warming.
• The proposed power station which plants to operate burning 40% peat is unsustainable as peat is a finite resource and has no security of supply.
• The proposed development is contrary to Ireland’s National Climate Strategy 2007 – 2012 which requires reduction of heavy reliance on fossil fuels.
• No specific source of peat is identified in the EIS which only states a local source within Co. Mayo would be preferable. In their view EIS is technically inadequate in failing to asses the location and site effects of the peat extraction process.
• IPCC has 179 peat land sites in Mayo listed 60 of which have not been designated for conservation and many of these unprotected sites have been drained and exploited for peat extraction but are still relatively intact and are worthy of conservation.
• EIS gives little consideration to the impact of the peat extraction process on the blanket bog environment. Blanket bog sourced in Co. Mayo is given as a possible option for peat source to supply the proposed electricity power station.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 49 of 86 • In order for an informed decision on the proposed development and the use of peat land habitats as a fuel source it is critical that the status extend and value of peat land habitats be given full recognition and waiting in this report.
• The development is totally contrary to the ethos of protecting biodiversity in the county.
9.2 By An Taisce
The submission by An Taisce concur with the grounds of appeal presented by the other appellants.
9.3 By George and Robert Carroll (main points include)
• Major safety hazard- that will caused by the increase of HGV traffic on Mullafarry Road. They note in particular that no traffic management plan has been discussed to prevent use of this road for haulage of timber or peat.
• Vibration produced during the construction phase of the plant- as the area of the proposed development is an area of large limestone deposits they are concerned of vibration and structural damage to their property which is very close to proposed works.
• The proximity of the development to their home and the noise produced- the generation unity would be 530 metres from their home and the chipper unit 420 metres and they are concerned of excess noise levels both during construction and during operation. They note predicted day time noise levels to be 61 decibels when the EPA recommended standard is nothing above 55 decibels. For night time the predicted noise level is 54 decibels while EPA standard is nothing above 45 decibels.
• Dust produced in the operation of the plant and construction of the plant- impact on their home and surrounding land and the livestock.
• Value of the land and the holding- they are concerned that the proposed development would have detrimental effect on the value of their assets as the position of the plant bordered all their holdings and would make any sale of land for housing impossible if needed to support home farm business.
9.4 By Friends of the Irish environment
Supporting the appeals against a proposal on the grounds that the proposed plant would undermine sustainable development, increase global warming unnecessarily through use of peat as a fuel. It is also stated that the decision of
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 50 of 86 the Planning Authority was issued prematurely by failing to respect the Senior Planner’s requirement for further information before any decision was made.
They refer to FIE request in relation to government and European Commission’s position through a parliamentary question tabled by a MEP, they ask the Board to appraise itself of the replies these queries, as the decision must be informed by national and European Policy ( appendix III provides a copy of the questions stated to have been posed in relation to peat burning whether these are included in the allocations for Ireland, whether the plant would avail of new entry emission allocations, what assessment has been carried out regarding biodiversity implications under the EIA Directive, and carbon sink implications, potential of Ireland’s peatlands as a carbon sink and Commission’s long term plans for protecting Europe’s peatlands).
The submission goes on to state that under the United Nations framework convention on climate change (UNFCCC article 4(1) (d) Ireland is committed to promote sustainable management and to promote and incorporate in the conservation and enhancement of sinks and reservoirs of all greenhouse gasses not controlled by the Montréal protocol including biomass forests and oceans as well as other territorial coastal and marine echo systems.
They submit that it is a scientific fact that the extraction of peat for a fuel represents a net lost Ireland of this carbon sink and that burnt as a fuel it further increases Irelands contribution to global warming for an excess of even other fossil fuels. In their view national climate change strategy does not envisage a proposal like this and is certainly contrary to the aim or the strategy which is to reduce Ireland’s dependence on fossil fuels which actively seeks to replace fossil fuels with bio fuels in the existing plans reflecting the Government’s policy imperatives.
The submission stresses that they are greatly concerned that permission would be premature in the absence of any reply to the questions posed by the Senior Planner. They refer to responsibilities of Mayo County Council as a consent authority under the EIA Directive.
9.5 By PJ McNamara and others
Attaching a list of signatures and stated that these consisted of former Bord na Mona workers who live in the greater Ballina district and who worked in the supply of peat at Bellacorick states that they have adapted the resolution giving full support to the proposed power plant to be constructed by Mayo Power Ltd.
9.6 By North Mayo peat Industrial Committee
Also attaching a list of signatures the secretary for the committee refer to the closure of the Bellacorick peat burning power station and the resolution of the meeting to provide full support for the proposed power station.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 51 of 86
9.7 By Asahi Development Committee on other appeals
The submission fully supports the concerns expressed by An Taisce, Asahi Development Committee and by Killala Community Council.
10. RELEVANT POLICY AND GUIDELINES
The European Union policy on energy has been provided in a number of papers most recent of which include:
• Green paper on energy policy, : Doing More With Less ; 2006
• An Energy Policy for Europe ( EC, 2007 )
• Renewable Energy Road map 2007
10.1 The first of these the Green Paper on Energy -Doing More With Less established the main parameters for European Energy policy as being security of supply, sustainability, and competitiveness.
The follow up paper- An energy policy for Europe established the overall objective of unilateral emission reductions targets of below 20% of 1990 levels by the year 2020 while setting an objective of moving towards near zero emissions from coal by 2020.
These were incorporated into the Renewable Energy Road Map 2007 as binding targets.
At the national level the energy policy is covered under a number of documents including:
• National development plan 2007 – 2013 • Green pape r Towards a sustainable Energy future for Ireland-2006 • White Paper “Delivering a Sustainable Energy Future for Ireland ” – the energy policy framework 2007 – 2020 • Bioenergy Action Plan for Ireland - Report of the Ministerial task force on Bioenergy • National climate change strategy 2007 – 2012. • National strategy on sustainable development 1997 • National special strategy 2002 – 2020.
10.2 The overall strategic objective of the energy programme under NDP 2007- 2013 would be to ensure security of energy supply national and regionally with high level of environmental standards. The programme would consist of three sub programmes.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 52 of 86 The government’s energy policy was outlined in the Green Paper which set out the three pillars of energy policy as (a) security of supply (b) sustainability and (c) competitiveness.
Under the Sustainable Energy sub programme over the period of 2007 – 2013 bio energy sector is considered as an emerging new area in which there would be increased policy focus over the lifetime of the new plan. A target of 15% contribution by renewable energy to electricity generation by 2010 has been set.
10.3 Informed by the outcome of the consultation process on the Green Paper, the government White Paper “Delivering a Sustainable Energy Future for Ireland ” – The Energy Policy Framework 2007 – 2020 stated
The Government’s energy policy framework is set firmly in the global and European context which has put energy security and climate change among the most urgent international challenges…..The government energy policy and climate change goals are closely aligned and would be fully reflected in the climate change strategy. Plans for reducing energy demand and energy related emissions through ambitious renewable energy targets (including co firing biomass with peat), the state of the art power generation plant and inter connection to wider markets will contribute in a major way to national climate change targets. (Executive Summary).
Actions to ensure security of supply would include ‘ Enhancing the diversity of fuels used for power generation ’ (Strategic Goal 3), which highlighted that high level of reliance on gas was seen as unsustainable from security of supply point of view, and that the Government was committed to reduce over-reliance on natural gas for power generation. Provided that the environmental impacts can be managed effectively with the emerging clean coal technologies, coal had the potential to the Irish power generation mix over the long term. Co- firing of biomass with peat and other fossil fuels offered identified potential and the Government was fully supportive of its development. Biomass power generation would be supported through REFIT tariff scheme (3.4)
The underpinning the strategic goals under actions to promote the sustainability of energy supply would include:
• Addressing climate change by reducing energy related greenhouse emissions . • Accelerating the growth of renewable energy sources. • Delivering an integrated approach to the sustainable development and use of bio energy resources.
10.4 The National Climate Change Strategy 2007 – 2012 refers to the White Paper on energy and states that there are significant synergies between the White Paper and the NCCS. The White Paper recognised that energy policy must make a substantial contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 53 of 86 through energy efficiency improvements, changes in the fuel mix and the increased use of renewable energy.
Under emissions reductions in the sector it is stated that the government supported the co firing of biomass with peat in power generation as a means of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and introducing additional diversity into the fuel mix for power generation. The government had established a target for biomass to contribute up to 30% of energy input at peat stations by 2015 which would contribute to the achievement of the overall renewable electricity target of 33% by 2020. It was estimated that achievement of this target could reduce emissions from power stations by 900,000 tons per annum by 2015. For the period of 2008 and 2012 the power stations were included in the EU emissions trading scheme.
Potential benefit of combined heat and power (CHP) was constrained by economic factors and actions to stimulate included support for small scale CHP and large scale biomass fed CHP underpinned by a target to achieve an installed capacity of 400 mega watts by 2010 and 800 mega watts by 2020. The achievement of this target would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
10.5 The Bioenergy Action Plan for Ireland set a target of 33% for renewable electricity for 2020, and expand the REFIT-feed- in-tariff support scheme to facilitate delivery of co-firing in peat stations of 30% by 2015.
Wood biomass had the potential to play a major role in Ireland’s national bio energy strategy and can be generated from fastenings of plantations, forest residues, shorter rotation forest energy crops, co products such a saw dust bark and untreated recycled wood. A number of studies had assessed the potential contribution of wood biomass and EPA had identified a potential for 0.5 million tons of wood residues available each year for energy recovery. (chapter four)
The target of 30% co-firing in peat stations with biomass by 2015 would itself stimulate a very significant demand boost for biomass feedstock.
The three peat burning stations burned a total of three million tons of peat per annum and it was estimated that 30,000 hectares of indigenous energy crops could replace every 10% of this power which is co fired. Potential barriers to this development included the need for a year round supply of suitable raw material and environmental concerns (loss of biodiversity) from growing large amounts of energy crops close to the power stations, but with right crop mix, site selection and husbandry practices these issues could be overcome.
To further encourage the move towards biomass electricity generation REFIT support would be provided for co-firing renewable feedstock in existing as well as new thermal plants.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 54 of 86 The EU biomass action plan and the EU renewable road map 2007 reiterated to contribution which the biomass sector could make to Europe’s renewable energy targets for electricity, heating and transport through full implementation of the biomass action plan.
10.6 The National Strategy on Sustainable Development,- 1997 noted the high dependence on fossil fuels for energy generation and recognised the role of biomass as renewable energy source at the same time acknowledging that peat lands are a unique echo system and the government is committed to conserving bog lands.
Other relevant policy documents include National Spatial Strategy 2002 – 2020 , and the Regional Planning Guidelines for the west region 2004 – 2016 .
10.7 The National Spatial Strategy (NSS) gives priority to improving reliability of electricity supply in north western parts of the Country.
10.8 The Regional Planning Guidelines for the West Region states that under the EU Renewable Energy Directive Ireland is expected to increase its share of electricity consumption from renewable sources from 4% to 13% by 2010.
Noting that it is important that Ireland fulfils its obligation under the Kyoto Protocol and that Ireland is significantly above its target of greenhouse gas emissions, it further states that the quality of supply of energy in Ireland is a major factor in retaining industry operating in the information technology and telecommunications sectors and as stated in the NSS reliable and effective energy systems to power industry and services are key instruments for effective regional development.
The Guidelines refer to particular emphasis on the reinforcement of the grid in western counties and the suggestion by the NSS that in addition to this, power corridors would be needed to augment the capacity of the grid in Galway, Mayo, and Sligo.
The guidelines refer to infrastructure deficiencies in many rural areas in terms of capacity and quality of electricity networks. In particular large areas of the west and north-west would need some investment on up-to-date facilities producing electricity in order to make the region internationally competitive.
11. MAYO COUNTY DEVELOPMENT PLAN
11.1 The statutory development plan is the County Development Plan 2003- 2007 .
The County Development Plan identifies Natural Resources as one of the key areas for consideration and states:
Key issue to ensure that wind energy and other renewable energy sources aggregate material and other valuable resources including gas,
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 55 of 86 forestry, fishing, aquaculture, fisheries etc are developed to their full potential but in manner that has due regard to environmental protection, bio-diversity conservation and the preservation of visual, scenic and residential amenities.
Under overall strategy, transport and infrastructure development aims include • To ensure that energy supply and distribution throughout the countries is expanded and upgraded sufficiently to enable the economy, enterprise and other developments to locate in the county.
• To optimise development of appropriate renewable energy sources which make use of the natural resources of the area concerned in an environmentally acceptable and sustainable manner.”
Specific objectives include
Energy TI – E 1 It’s an objective of the Council to seek and facilitate extension of the national 220 KV electricity network in Mayo along with the extension of the associated fibre wrapped ESB broadband loop.
TI – E2 It’s an objective of the Council to seek adverse abject improvements of the electricity network in Mayo
TI – E3 It is an objective of the Council to facilitate a development of alternative sources of power generation, such as CHPs (combined heat and power plants) and to encourage their inclusion in new developments where appropriate.
TI-E5 It is an objective of the Council to have a gas powered generating station built in North mayo
Renewable energy
TI – RE1 Is an objective of he Council in support of the National Climate Change Strategy, to encourage the production of energy from renewable sources, in particular that from biomass, wind, solar power, tidal, hydro, wave and geothermal.
11.2 The relevant policies of the Draft Mayo County Development Plan 2007 which is at an advance stage include:
Overall strategy
To ensure that the energy supply and distribution throughout mayo is expanded and upgraded sufficiently to enable the economy, enterprise and other developments to locate in the County.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 56 of 86 The specific objectives include
Energy
O/ TI-E1 it is the policy of the Council to seek and facilitate the extension of the national 220kV electricity network in Mayo along with the extension of the associated fibre wrapped ESB broadband loop
O/ TI-E2 It is the policy of the Council to support the development of a gas powered generating station in North Mayo
Renewable energy
P/TI-RE1 it is the policy of the Council to support the national Climate Change Strategy 2000, and reduced energy consumption be encouraging energy efficiency, low energy design and integrating renewable energy techniques into new and existing developments including Council’s own operations
P/ TI-RE2 it is the policy of the Council to encourage the production of energy from renewable sources, in particular that from biomass, forestry, wind, solar power, tidal, hydro, wave and geothermal
12. ASSESSMENT
12.1 Introduction
The proposed development is for a 100MW electricity generating station to operate in a combined heat and power (CHP) mode. The fuel input would consist of wood (biomass), peat and coal which would be mixed with oil/gas as the start up fuel. Lime would be used in the fluidised beds. The power station would generate furnace and fly ash. The steam generated by the process would be made available to industry which could locate nearby.
The application is accompanied by an EIS provided at the request of the planning authority (the proposed development is below the threshold of 300MW for requirement of an EIS). During the course of the application further information and clarification of further information was requested by the planning authority.
The proposed development would require an IPPC licence from the EPA. In addition, the applicants would be required to obtain a GHG (Greenhouse Gas) permit also from the EPA.
The proposed development would be located at an existing industrial estate formerly occupied by Asahi. Currently an ESB diesel peaking plant operates from the estate with 2 110kV connections to the national grid providing electricity during high demand.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 57 of 86
Apart from a company which provides bulk containers to drinks industry, the only other buildings that are partly occupied are the small administrative buildings previously associated by Asahi. The general outlook of the purpose built industrial estate is one of desertion and neglect.
12.2 Issues for consideration
From my review of the file, submissions, and examination of relevant documents I consider the main issues for consideration in this appeal to be:
1. Whether the proposed development would be in accordance with relevant policies at various levels and be acceptable in principle. In particular: • Whether there is a need for the proposed facility, and if so, • Whether the proposed development would represent a reasonable response to address such a need, having regard to various policies at EU and national levels for sustainable energy supply, and climate change, and having regard to alternatives in terms of type, location, and capacity • Whether the information submitted is adequate for the purposes of making a decision on the proposed development and in compliance with the requirements EIA Directive
2. Whether the proposed development would be acceptable in terms of impact on peatlands and protection of natural heritage
3. Whether the proposed development would be acceptable in terms of traffic safety 4. Whether the proposed development would be acceptable in terms of its impact on the amenities of residential property in the vicinity
5. Whether the proposed development would be acceptable in terms of its impact on the visual amenity
6. other issues
12.3.1 The need
The proposed development is located in an area where there seems to be an overall agreement regarding inadequacy of electricity infrastructure.
The Regional Planning Guidelines for the West Region (2004-2015) refer to infrastructural deficiencies in many rural areas in large areas of North- west, in terms of capacity and quality of electricity networks.
In the report for the planning authority it is stated
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 58 of 86 Electricity infrastructure in County Mayo is relatively weak with little or no dispatchable generation located in this area since the closure of Bellacorrick power station .
I also note the letter from CER (Commission for Energy Regulation) addressed to the applicants states:
The commission is aware that the electricity infrastructure in the County Mayo is relatively weak. Following the closure of Bellacorrick power station there is little or no dispatchable generation located in this area.
The White Paper on energy states:
We will need substantial new investment in conventional power generation in the order of at least 1000MW to 2013 to meet the demand growth and the planned closure of older plants. (3.9.3)
Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude that a need does indeed arise for power generating infrastructure, in general and in the north-west.
I note that while there is a view point that the existing oil fired ESB peaking plant (granted in 2007 under PL 16.221542) would be adequate to meet the needs of the area, in the main the arguments presented in the grounds of appeal do not relate to whether or not a power generating facility is needed in the area, but rather to the type and location of the facility.
12.3.2 Policies on energy supply
In addressing the need of the area for energy supply, it is submitted by some of the appellants that a gas power station would be preferable to the proposed co-firing with wood, peat and coal.
In their response it is submitted by the applicants that the national policy is to reduce reliance on natural gas (which is imported) as there is no security of supply. They draw attention to issues relating to Corrib Gas and maintain that its availability in the near future is not certain. They submit up to 80% of the fuel source would be indigenous which will assist security of supply.
They also draw attention to recent non-renewal of a permission for a gas powered plant at Bellacorick after expiry of the five year permission, and withdrawal of an application for a open cycle gas turbine peaking plant at Claremorris, Co. Mayo. They maintain that security of supply is a significant issue for consideration.
The European and national policy on energy supply puts strong emphasis on the security of energy supply and sustainability. The over all strategic objective of the Energy Programme of the NDP is to ensure security of energy supply nationally and regionally, while meeting a high level of environmental standards. The NDP refers to Ireland’s growing dependence on imported fossil
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 59 of 86 fuels with the consequent growth in green house gas emissions and states that security of supply and lessening the dependence on any one source of energy or fuel supply will be a key challenge.
The white paper D elivering a Sustainable Energy Future for Ireland -The Energy Policy Framework 2007-2020, refers to the energy policy being developed around the three pillars of security of supply, sustainability ad competitiveness (2.2.2).
Within the policy Framework, and under this main objective, a strategic goal is to enhance the diversity of fuels used for power generation (3.1.5).
The white paper considers high level reliance on gas as being unsustainable, and refers to government’s commitment to reducing over-reliance on natural gas in power generating sector. (3.4.1).
The proposed development would be in line with these policies to reduce over reliance on gas and to ensure security of supply.
Fuel mix and emissions
It is submitted by some of the appellants and observers that the fuel mixture proposed in the development (particularly peat) is unacceptable and contrary to policies on sustainability and climate change.
In their response it is maintained by the applicants that the proposed development in the main relies on renewables (biomass), and would help achieve the objective of diversity of supply. They also submit the proposed development provide dispatchable energy which would support wind energy which can provide energy on an intermittent basis . In relation to CO 2 emissions they submit that they would need to operate within the emissions trading scheme and require a permit form the EPA. They also draw attention to efficiencies arising from the proposed CHP plant, which would be taken into account in the permit.
The fuel mix proposed is 25-40% biomass (wood), 40% peat and 20% coal (the percentage of coal will increase to 35% in the low biomass scenario). Of these biomass is the only component that is openly encouraged under the national policy.
The White Paper, (under the Strategic Goal of Delivering an Integrated Approach to Sustainable use of Bioenergy Resources), refers to importance of indigenous bioenergy sources and actions through various schemes such as bio energy crop scheme, energy crop assistance scheme and biomass harvesting schemes. It further refers to support for delivery of targets for biomass in the heating sector, and acceleration of development of reliable supply chain in the wood energy sectors. (3.12)
Under the strategic goal of ‘Addressing Climate Change by Reducing Energy Related Greeen House Gas emissions’, it is stated that the carbon intensity of
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 60 of 86 electricity production will continue to be progressively reduced with greater penetration of renewable energy, co-firing with bio-mass and planned replacement of older generation plants by 2020, (3.9.3).
The White Paper also states that while wind generation is expected to deliver vast majority of our 2010 renewable energy electricity targets and contribute significantly towards 2020 targets of 33%, but that it is an intermittent source for energy. In line with commitment to develop a broad range of renewable technologies going forward, biomass electricity would being actively supported, as it had the advantage of being dispatch able, i.e. available on demand.
The Bioenergy Action Plan sets a target of 30% co-firing in peat stations with biomass by 2015, and states: ‘ to further encourage the move towards biomass electricity generation, REFIT support will be provided for co-firing renewable feedstock in existing as well as in new thermal plants ’. (chapter 5).
In view of the above, while I do have reservations regarding percentage of biomass component in low biomass scenario, and note the legitimate concerns raised by third parties regarding availability of wood or other biomass in the proposed development and the problems that would arise as a result of non- availability, it is quite clear that it is a government policy to support use of biomass in electricity generation.
It would therefore be reasonable to conclude that the proposed development is in accordance with the policies for diversification of fuels used for power generation, and in particular use of biomass in co-firing.
I do have concerns regarding the proportion of biomass in proposed fuel mix, particularly in the ‘low biomass scenario’ in the region of 25%. I also note that in their letter addressed to the applicants CER notes that the biomass component would be 20% but that it may increase over time. I consider these to be too low, in terms of compliance with the stated policies. I note in the Bioenergy Action Plan it is stated that EPA has identified a potential for 0.5 million tonnes of wood residues available each year for energy recovery. In the event of a decision to grant, I recommend a condition requiring minimum 40% biomass component to be achieved within 3 years of commencement of development. This would allow adequate time to the applicants to engage with a number local producers.
The second element of the fuel mix to be used in the proposed development is peat. The proposal would include 40% peat. This is particularly important as not only its burning contributes to CO 2 emissions at higher level, but also removes peat reserves which act as a carbon sink.
I note the observations from The Irish Peatland Conservation Council maintain that burning of peat is a significant contributor to Irelands CO 2 emissions as peat emits a high level of CO 2 per unit of energy and is the least carbon efficient of all fossil fuels. They draw attention to the EPA figures for 2005 and state that these showed emissions from energy industries in Ireland
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 61 of 86 (increased for which contributing factor was peat used at the expense of natural gas). They also submit that peat extraction process also contributes to global warming through oxidisation of peat as it is harvested and by removing a carbon sink that would otherwise continue to hold and absorb CO 2.
The White Paper on Sustainable Energy states that the sustainability is at the heart of Irish Energy Policy (3.8.1). It further states that the government energy policy and climate change goals are closely aligned and would be fully reflected in the Climate Change Strategy. Plans for reducing energy demand and energy related emissions through ambitious renewable energy targets (including co firing biomass with peat), the state of the art power generation plant and inter connection to wider markets would contribute in a major way to national climate change targets.
The paper emphasises that the energy policy must make a substantial contribution reducing greenhouse gas emissions through energy efficiency improvements, changes in the fuel mix and increased use of renewable energy.
Based on these it would be reasonable to conclude that the policy is not to prohibit use of peat completely either on its own or as part of a co-firing power station, but rather the policies seem to aim to reduce the amount of peat through use of biomass in ‘peat’ stations (30%). This is also actively promoted in the National Strategy for Climate Change, in order to reduce emissions.
While the Climate change strategy does not specifically refer to new power stations, the Bioenergy Action Plan states that to further encourage the move towards biomass electricity generation REFIT support would be provided for co-firing renewable feedstock in existing as well as new thermal plants.
While I note that it is submitted by the first party that peat is used in some Nordic countries with EU approval, in the absence of documentary evidence to indicate that this is so, and would be so in the future, it would not be appropriate to draw any conclusions regarding EU approval of peat as a co- firing fuel.
The third component of the fuel mix is coal. The proposed development envisages co firing with coal between 20%-35%, depending on the availability of biomass component.
Coal is stated to be introduced to the proposed development as a measure to mitigate corrosion experienced in other power stations and to improve combustion characteristics of the fuel mix. It is proposed as the last component of the fuel mix and at the lowest proportion, (though it would be increased to 35% in the case of low- biomass scenario bringing it up to the second level).
The arguments put forward by the first party, is that coal is very much a part of national energy policy and co-firing of biomass with peat and other fossil fuels. They maintain use of coal is supported by the Government.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 62 of 86 The White Paper refers to coal being in long world supply and being not correlated to other fossil fuels such as oil or gas. It also refers to coal as having a potential to contribute to the power generation over the long term subsequent to development of clean coal technology advances in the EU, and a new clean coal power generation plant before 2020. It is stated that co-firing of biomass with peat and other fossil fuels is considered to offer identified potential and the government is fully supportive of its development. (3.4.4).
Clean coal technology has not yet been achieved, and therefore I would conclude that while it is considered to have potential it is not in its present state a part of the energy policy. In view of the support for development of potential of co-firing of biomass with peat and other fossil fuels, it would in my view be unreasonable to refuse permission based on the coal component of the proposed development.
I should note that while I consider it acceptable as a supporting fuel enabling realisation of use of biomass in power generation, I consider the low bio mass scenario (which would require 35% coal) to be unacceptable.
Combined heat and power
An objective of the White Paper, (under the strategic goal of Accelerating Growth of Renewable Energy Sources) is a considerable growth in combined heat and power (CHP) deployment to 2020. Indeed combined heat and power stations (CHP) are supported by the National Climate Change Strategy which sets a target of 400MW by 2010.
In general, CHP plants achieve higher efficiency and there is also gains as energy is not lost during transmission from the source to the user. This is increasingly taken into account in calculation of allowances for green house gas emissions.
The proposed development would be in line with the above policy and objectives.
County Development Plan
The County Development Plan policies aim at developing natural resources to their full potential while having due regard to environmental protection. Supply and distribution of energy to enable the economy, and location of developments to locate in the county is one of the strategic aims of the County Development Plan. the proposed development is in line with these.
While there is a specific objective for provision of a gas powered electricity generating station, there is also a specific objective for development of alternative sources of power generation such as CHP, and production of energy from renewable sources including biomass. The proposed development is in line with this.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 63 of 86
In view of the above I would conclude:
• I consider the proposed development to be in line with the National policies to reduce reliance on natural gas, diversity of fuels and promotion of indigenous renewable energy sources (biomass) in electricity production.
• I am satisfied that the proposed development would be in line with the policy to provide dispatchable electricity generated from co-firing with biomass, in a supporting role to intermittent wind generated electricity,
• While I do accept the arguments that use of peat as part of fuel in co-firing would lead to increased CO 2, and would lead to removal of an existing carbon sink (peatland), the present policies do not prohibit removal / use of peat completely. Therefore it would not be reasonable to conclude that proposed development would be in contravention of the commitment by Ireland to promote a ‘sustainable management ’ of sinks and reservoirs of green house gases.
• I am satisfied that the proposed development is in line with the provisions of National Climate Strategy which aims at reducing emissions by introducing additional diversity into the fuel mix for power stations including co-firing with biomass in ‘peat only’ power stations
• The proposed development is in line with the polices outlined in the Bioenergy Action Plan
• The proposed development is in line with the policy to support increased CHP capacity
• The proposed development is in line with the policies of the National Spatial Strategy and Regional Planning Guidelines to address the existing energy deficits in the region.
• The proposed development is in line with the County Development Plan policies regarding supply and distribution of energy.
12.3.3 Site Selection and Consideration of Alternatives (fuel, location, disposal)
It is submitted by the appellants that the applicants did not give adequate consideration to other alternatives such as provision of a gas powered electricity generating station. They also maintain that if a power station using peat and timber as fuel is proposed then such a station would best be located at Bellacorrig close to peat supplies.
In their response it is submitted by the applicants that their consultants RWE are of the opinion that a mixed fuel CHP plant is the both best option for this site as a mixed fuel power plant as it is endorsed by a number of strategic
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 64 of 86 objectives which the government is seeking in the future including increased use of biomass fuels, the need to increase Ireland’s security of supply from indigenous sources, and the need to raise Ireland’s CHP plant portfolio.
They submit that the proposed development would enable former peat farmers to return to work and create opportunities in the forestry and energy crops farming sector. They state that similar peat/wood/coal CHP power stations in Finland and Sweden such power stations continue to be built in direct competition with gas fired power plants.
They further state that the consultants would not consider developing a gas fired power plant at any location where there is no secure source of gas available. In that regard they refer to recent withdrawal of planning application for the development of an open cycle gas turbine peeking plant at Claremorris, County Mayo.
A gas fired plant would need to be at least 400 megawatts to be economically feasible (they note non renewal of an existing permission for a 70 megawatt gas fired power plant at Bellacorrig). The additional consideration was the capacity of the existing grid which could not support the 400 megawatt power plant.
In terms of alternative sites they submit that while they did consider the former ESB Bellacorrig power station they found that the site had no infrastructure to support a CHP development and was distant from population centres and potential employees and therefore was much less likely to be attractive to other businesses and industries.
The Section 2.4 of the EIS examined the alternatives for the proposed power station. The location is examined under the headings of regional site selection and local site selection. The former included Bangor Erris, Bellacorrig, and the appeal site examining each against a set of criteria.
The proposed development is stated to be based on the findings of a report by Uduras na Gaeltachta and the North Western Mayo Development Group in 2001 entitled ‘Pre-feasibility study on a 30 mega watt peat fuelled electricity generating plant to be located at Bangor Erris, County Mayo’. The report has concluded that whilst peat reserves were available the proposal would only be economic if amended in some way or if subsidised by grants. It also recommended that another way to make the project more profitable would be to go for combined heat and power generation.
The proposed development have implemented the suggestions in terms of increased size, use of a combined heat and power, use of wood and coal in co- firing.
The proposed development is not for a gas powered electricity generation station and would need to be assessed in terms of its suitability to meet the needs of the area as proposed.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 65 of 86 I have no compelling documentary evidence before me to indicate that the applicants have not examined the suitability of a gas power station as an alternative or to contradict the findings of the consultants for the applicants.
Overall I am satisfied that a reasonable site selection process has been engaged in and reasonable number of alternative sites have been examined within the region. I’m also satisfied that the consideration of alternatives in terms of types of power station that could be constructed at this site is of reasonable standard.
Based on the information before me I consider it would be unreasonable refuse permission on the basis that a gas powered station would provide a better solution to the energy needs of north Mayo or to conclude that a gas powered station would be a superior alternative to the proposed development in terms of availability of input materials, compliance with government policies, possible benefits from the output, adequacy of the electricity network, and the capacity of the electricity grid.
There is no evidence before me to contradict the argument that due to economies of scale, a gas fired plant would need to be at least 400 megawatts in capacity to be economically feasible while the capacity of the local electricity grid in Mayo would not have sufficient capacity to support a 400 megawatt power plant.
I also accept the argument that the appeal site being located in an existing industrial site with necessary infrastructure would be more conducive to location of future industries to benefit from the steam output from the proposed development, and that itself would benefit from the existing road and other infrastructure.
In terms of selection of fuel types the EIS states that this was decided following discussions with technology suppliers and users of similar technology. They maintain that the combustion technology planned is very flexible in the type of fuels it can accommodate while ensuring good combustion and emissions. They stress that the peat fired power plants in the midlands have had major problems with corrosion as a result of not using coal in the fuel mix. They maintain the plant would be able to burn a wide range of biomass materials if they become available in the future (though the details of these are not provided). I have no documentary evidence before me to contradict or invalidate these findings.
The Section 2.5 of the EIS provides alternative schemes for ash disposal (furnace i.e. bottom ash and pulverised fly ash). The preferred option by the first party is neutralisation of the ash as a materials input by third parties. When ash is mixed with a small amount of cement it would produce a viable road building material. 80% of the ash produced by a power plant was utilised in that manner. The EIS also refer to the research carried out by the consultants for the proposed development in relation to ash produced by CFB boilers which found that in Europe 50% was used as a materials input rather than being sent to landfill or equivalent.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 66 of 86 While disposal of ash to landfill was considered as an option this was not a preferred option. The EIS used a site selection process to eliminate exclusion areas and to highlight promising areas using various guidelines. The areas identified as promising were lands near the power station site, lands with access from regionally significant roads, industrial areas and compatible public lands. During the course of the application the Planning Authority asked further information and clarification of further information in relation to these non exclusionary sites. In their response the applicants reiterated that they do not intend to dispose ash by landfill and that none of the sites indicated were included as part of the planning application but rather submitted by way of background information only. They further stated that the applicants have no legal interest in the concerned lands and as such access was not available to carry out any detailed analyses. They concluded that if a back landfill is required for any residual ash then they would need to contract an existing licensed landfill within a reasonable radius of the plant or submit a separate planning application. They noted there was unused capacity at the Bellacorrick landfill following closure of the power plant.
While these are reasonable, the applicants have not provided commitments by third parties backed by documentary evidence on how much of the ash produced by the proposed development would be accepted as a materials input. Though due to cost related reasons, I have no doubt this will be an avenue actively pursued by the applicant.
Nevertheless, in the event of a decision to grant permission I recommend a condition requiring that prior to commencement of operations, the applicant provide documentary evidence to indicate at least 50% of ash produced by the power station be accepted by third parties as a materials input, and identify the location of the landfill to accept the remainder. As the commencement of operations would be in 2011 this should give adequate time to pursue the matter and secure a sustainable disposal of the waste generated by the proposed development .
Overall I consider that the issue of alternatives has been satisfactorily covered to ensure compliance with the European Directive which requires an outline of the main alternatives studied.
12.3.4 Availability of fuel supplies
Peat Supply
In response to the further information and clarification of further information request by the Planning Authority regarding potential peat supply the applicants refer to five bog areas of which three were owned by Bord na Mona. These three contained 5.6 million tons of peat, while of the other two, one in County Cavan was under negotiation for lease or purchase and was estimated to have 1.3 million tons of reserves (at a very low estimate). The applicants also stated that the remaining harvestable quantity at Bellacorrig was 160,000 tons per annum over seven years i.e. 1.1 million tons. They
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 67 of 86 concluded that the total amount of peat available for the proposed development would be approximately 7.9 million tons which would be adequate to supply the proposed development over 20 years at 400,000 tons per annum.
They also referr to substantial potential from the boglands owned by Coillte in which they cease planting trees, and maintain that these contained a resource of at least nine million tons which would meet the requirement for the proposed development over a 40 year period at 400,000 tons per annum.
On the basis of these and leaving the issues of sustainability of peat extraction at such quantities and at such locations, it would be reasonable to conclude that the applicants do seem to have access to adequate peat supplies to operate the proposed development.
Timber/biomass Supply
In response to the information requested by the Planning Authority regarding evidence that the suppliers could provide the amount of timber required for the high biomass scenario over the expected life of the power the applicants stated that they have obtained letters of support for a biomass intake of 700,000 tons a year excluding Coillte and their intention is to use as much local wood as possible subject to availability on the price. They estimated to obtain up to 200,000 tons of wood to include a combination of wood chips, short rotation willow and sawdust.
They noted that approximately 150,000 tons of Coillte mature wood was transported each year from north-west (Mayo and Sligo) to Waterford with a return journey of 550 miles and Coillte was considering economic feasibility of log importation to supply the Waterford mill. In their view there would a strong commercial incentive for Coillte to divert their supplies of pulpwood from Waterford to the north-west.
They further stated that subject to price and availability imported wood would be used to supplement any shortfall if necessary. The plant would be designed to be very flexible in terms of fuel mix with the capacity to increase wood used significantly as it becomes available. In particular willow was considered as a short rotation energy crop for which they had strong expression of interest from a number of local farmers and cooperatives.
During the course of the application the applicants indicated locations on the east coast of US for wood pellets, in the Baltic region for logs. Some other areas of the UK were also considered if and when shortage of supply arose. They maintain that as this would have cost implications they had concentrated on the proposed catchment area where they obtained expressions of interest for up to 200,000 tons of wood, noting a number of commercial incentives for co-firing with biomass (i.e. the Irish REFIT Tariff and avoidance of carbon credits).
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 68 of 86 In their response to the Planning Authority’s request for clarification of further information the applicants stated that they could commence commercial operation in 2011 by co-firing biomass to achieve 25% of generation. They also noted that the existence of the power station would itself provide a powerful and necessary incentive for the production of biomass fuels.
While there is sufficient evidence to suggest that the applicants are aiming to use as much biomass as a percentage of the overall fuel mix as possible (which would attract government incentives), there is a question mark over the availability of the timber products particularly from existing Coillte plantations which are stated to be almost entirely utilised to supply the Waterford plant.
In my view as the biomass element is the only part of the fuel that is environmentally acceptable and in conformity with sustainable energy policies, it is crucial that it forms the primary ingredient in the co-firing station.
In this regard despite the assurances given via the applicants at 25% biomass co-firing would be achieved at the beginning of the production at 2011 I would consider it appropriate that the minimum 40% within three years of commencement of operations should be required by way of a condition in the event of a decision to grant permission.
Coal Supply
The applicants intend to use coal as the third ingredient of the fuel mix mainly to counteract problems associated with burning of peat. The applicants intend to purchase the coal from the world market and state that the potential environmental impacts associated with coal sourcing and supply would be addressed by the producers, handlers and suppliers of the coal where required and does not form part of the EIS. Although no specific sources have been identified they will be of similar types delivered to the United Kingdom. The likely port for deliveries will be Sligo Harbour.
In the high biomass scenario the percentage of coal used in the fuel mix would be approximately 20%. While I’m satisfied that amount that would be required for this percentage could be obtained I have concerns about the increase in the percentage of the coal from 20% to 35% This in my view would not be in accordance with the policies regarding use of indigenous fuel and bio energy crops in power generation.
Lime supply
Having regard to the presence of an established limestone quarry nearby by I am satisfied regarding the availability of limestone for the proposed development in the required quantities.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 69 of 86 In view of the above overall I consider that adequate information has been provided for the purpose of making a decision on this application, in terms of availability of the main fuels in the co-firing process.
12.4 Compliance with the requirements of EIA Directive
The proposed power station with 100mw capacity is well below threshold of 400Mw where an EIS would be required. An EIS was submitted at the request of the planning authority.
I have considered the submitted information in the light of the EIA Directive, the EIA Regulations and the Guidelines prepared by the EPA (who are empowered to prepare Guidelines on the information to be contained in an EIS), and I am of the opinion that the submitted EIS is ‘legally’ adequate, in that all relevant headings have been covered, main alternatives have been considered, likely significant impacts have been identified and some mitigation measures proposed where required for the proposed development itself.
The deficiencies arose in relation to possible significant impacts at ‘sourcing’ of the input materials and at ‘disposal’ of output material. The detailed further information and clarification of further information requests by the planning authority does to a certain extent address the information deficit in these areas, identifying possible sources for input, and alternative options and locations for output disposal.
It is however important to note that the proposed activity is neither an extraction activity nor a disposal activity. Therefore, and for the purposes of making a decision on the proposed development it would be sufficient to require that the input materials are sourced from developments/operations which are authorised by way of a planning permission and preferably have themselves been subject of an adequate EIA process. A similar condition would be necessary for the disposal of ash.
12.5 Impact of the proposed peat extraction and Protection of Natural Heritage
While they welcome the development of a biomass fuelled power station, the submission by the Irish Peatland Conservation Council state that they cannot support the proposed development as it would result in the destruction of peatland habitats. Their main argument is that while some of the registered peat lands in County Mayo are not designated conservation areas (SACs or NHAs) the formal protection is not completed and that there are quite a number of unprotected sites (i.e. undesignated) which are relatively intact and are worthy of conservation.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 70 of 86 As the proposed development planned to operate burning 40% peat, they maintain it would be unsustainable as peat is a finite resource, and that it is not a sustainable energy source. These are reasonable considerations.
As discussed earlier the applicants have provided a reasonable amount of information regarding the source of peat supplies as well as the quantities that would be required for the next 20 years. They have also identified the sources from which these would be obtained. There is no evidence before me to indicate that these supplies would be sourced from habitats that are intact or worthy of conservation.
I note that the submission by the Irish Peatland Conservation Council does not specifically refer to the five bogs which are identified in response to the further information request by the planning authority. In view of the fact that three of these are managed by Bord na Mona, it would be reasonable to expect due care regarding compliance with EU Directives.
I do not have any information before me to indicate whether the two other sources identified are working bogs, or they are intact and worthy of conservation, or whether they are authorised by way of a planning permission (I note there may be exceptions involving pre 63 operations).
I have strong reservations regarding suggested peat extraction from boglands in Coillte ownership, instead of planting (or replanting) of woodlands. These if envisaged would need to be subject of a separate EIA process with particular emphasis not only on the impact of the natural resource but also in terms of impact on possible future carbon sink, and the cumulative impact of the two.
I would concur with the argument that an EIA process would be required for the sourcing of input materials (peat, wood and coal). I am however satisfied that this need not be done as part of the application for this project, but that each resource would need to go through its own EIA process, to enable it to operate as a source of specific material as part of an authorisation process such as planning application.
In this regard I draw attention to the provisions of Local Government (Planning and Development) (Amendment) Regulations, 2001, European Communities (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Amendment) Regulations 2001, Wildlife (Amendment) Act, 2000, and European Communities (Natural Habitats) (Amendment) Regulations, 2005, planning and Development Regulations, 2005, which provides mandatory requirements for and EIA for forestry developments of 50 ha and of sub-threshold developments where a project is likely to have significant effects on the environment. In the case of peat extraction the mandatory EIA threshold is 30 ha, while the planning threshold is 10 ha, with a provision for requirement of an EIA for sub- threshold projects, where a project is likely to have significant effects on the environment.
Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive requires the consenting authorities to issue consent only after ascertaining that the proposed development would not
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 71 of 86 have an adverse impact on the integrity of a European site. While none of the identified sources is stated to be a designated European site, based on the precautionary principle which underlies the Habitats Directive, it is important that input materials are not sourced from habitats which are also worthy of conservation or can be upgraded to conservation status with ease.
Therefore, for the purposes of making a decision on this application, in my view it would be sufficient to require that the input materials are obtained from resources which are ‘not unauthorised’ to supply the input material, (i.e. have the benefit of a planning permission preferably having gone through an EIA process, or in exceptional cases which are accepted as being of pre 63 operations)
I note that the views of the NPWS have been sought on this matter.
12.6 Traffic and Transport Impact
The main points of the appellants in relation to traffic and transport is that the traffic generated by the proposed development would be a major problem in the surrounding towns including Ballina and Killala and that the road infrastructure is inadequate to cater for the proposed development. They maintain that the Council gave inadequate consideration to road safety hazards arising from the increase in HGV traffic, and that the proposed development would be premature pending the construction of Crossmolina bypass. They submit that the EIS failed to assess the impact of the greenhouse gas emissions that will be generated by the transport of the fuel to the site.
During the course of the application and in response to the further information request by the Planning Authority, the applicants stated that the HGV movements presented in Section 6.4 of the EIS represented the worst case scenario that the proposed development would generate 216 HGVs and 102 LGV/car trips per day of which two thirds would travel to south to Ballina and one third travelling to north to Killala. This would translate an additional peak hour flow of 28 passenger units per hour in the southerly direction and 14 in the northerly direction creating a ratio flow capacity (RFC) of less than 0.02 which would be well below the normal acceptable threshold of 0.85. They further submitted that the traffic impact on Ballina Town at the highest level would be 2.3% increase in the traffic levels and less than the normal threshold of 5%. In any event they maintain that the imminent completion of the route linking N59 and R315 via Bearnaderg inner relief road would mean the HGV traffic to/from direction of Crossmolina would bypass Ballina Town Centre.
The assessment of the traffic and transport issues in the report for the Planning Authority is quite comprehensive and states that the concerns in relation to the road haulage element of the proposals do not relate to traffic congestion but rather the long term sustainability of transporting anything up to 1,300,000 tons of fuel annually by trucks and its impact on the residential amenity, structural impact on the network and the width alignment of roads and road
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 72 of 86 safety. The report states that there will be a considerable cost to a number of local authorities over the 20 years life of the plant as they will be required to maintain the road network impacted by the HGVs. The report raises concerns that not only Mayo road network will be effected but also Galway, Sligo, Roscommon, Clare and others and contribution made to Mayo County Council towards the cost of maintaining the road network would not provide funding for the maintenance of roads in other counties as there is no mechanism for the transfer of levied contributions between counties.
The main issues regarding the traffic and transport aspect of this proposal relate to the carrying capacity of the road infrastructure and the impact of the proposed development on the same, impact on the residential amenity and impact on the climate change. In this section of my assessment I intend to concentrate only on the first item as I will look at the others in more detail under the appropriate headings.
R314 is a regional road of reasonable quality. Based on my observations during the site inspection it does not carry heavy volumes of traffic, and seems quite capable of accommodating the additional traffic generated by the proposed development. While the regional road itself is of reasonable standard some of the junctions particularly the one with the Mullafarry Road is quite substandard. Mullafarry Road is used by HGVs accessing the existing quarry. During my site inspection I have noted that Mullafarry Road which is very narrow and not capable of accommodating two lorries coming in opposite directions was recently resurfaced. I am satisfied that the closure of the access from the appeal site onto Mullafarry Road is appropriate. This however does not overcome the fact that some trucks will be carrying lime from the quarry to the appeal site using the rather dangerous junction. Therefore the suggested improvements at the junction of regional road with Mullafarry Road are appropriate and indeed essential.
The access point to the appeal site was developed for the Asahi Business Park and is of reasonable standard being located on the inside of the bend. I was however quite surprised to note that on the approach from the northerly (Killala) direction the entrance to the industrial estate became visible only in the last minute. This is referred to as junction 1 in the drawings submitted. The proposed improvements in the form of ghost islands to accommodate right turning traffic to the industrial estate are therefore appropriate.
The main junction in Ballina Town is quite congested. While the increase in HGV levels at this junction would be below normally acceptable levels in terms of percentage, I am satisfied that it would have some adverse impact on this junction both in terms of traffic flows and associated impacts. I do not have documentary evidence before me to indicate when the bypass would be completed which would remove the HGVs from the junction. I would however, recommend a Traffic Management Plan specifying the routes to be taken by fuel deliveries. Requirement of a Traffic Management Plan during the construction period would also need to be submitted and agreed by the Planning Authority along the lines of the Condition No. 7.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 73 of 86
12.6.1 Impact of road transport on climate change
The applicants were required by the planning authority to submit alternatives to transport of fuel by road. In their response the applicants indicated that no alternative was available. Subsequently in response to third parties during the appeal they maintained that there was never rail connection to the industrial park, but that it terminated at Ballina. The submission concluded that transport of fuel in 2011 (commissioning date) would constitute only 0.02% of total carbon emissions form the proposed development and 0.001% of emissions nationally.
I am not clear if the carbon emissions due to transport component of the proposed development would be included in the carbon permit of the proposed development.
12.7 Impact on the Residential Amenity
The appeal site is located in an established industrial park in a rural area and at some distance from residential areas. There is however some ribbon development along the regional road and a small cluster at the junction of Mullafarry Road and the regional road.
The impact of the proposed development on these would arise from the traffic generation associated with the site, noise and vibration and dust. I note in the submission by one of the observers concern is also raised in terms of impact on the value of the farmland surrounding the appeal site and in particular on sale value of some of the land for housing.
During the preparation of the EIS the underlying background noise component was found to be 42dB(A) due to distant traffic noise and wind noise for daytime and 37dB(A) for night time. It is predicted that during the construction phase the average noise levels at the nearest houses would be in the vicinity of 45–56 dB(A) during daytime and 31–41dB(A) at night time. It is maintained that these are well within the EPA standards of 55dB(A) during daytime and 45 during the night time.
The appeal development is subject to IPPC licence and the noise levels associated with the proposed development after the commencement of the development would be controlled by the EPA. A condition limiting the construction hours would be necessary to prevent noise pollution during holidays and Sundays. Advanced warning for significant increase in the ambient noise levels for specialised construction activity such as piling or rock breaking would also be appropriate.
Similarly while the dust emissions during the operation of the plant would be subject to IPPC license requirements conditions would be necessary to control dust during the construction.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 74 of 86 The appeal development is located in an existing and rather well known industrial estate. In the absence of a documentary evidence to indicate adverse impact on the value of the surrounding farmland over and above the levels that would normally arise from being located adjacent to an industrial estate and solely arising from the proposed development, it would be unreasonable to refuse permission.
In addition, the future value of the farmland in the surrounding area for possible ribbon development in an unzoned rural area does not constitute a material consideration in this appeal.
12.8 Impact on Visual Amenity
The appeal site is located on a high ground and the existing plant is visible from quite a considerable area. The existing estate has an imposing presence in the landscape despite the fact that main structures despite being bulky are low lying. A few taller structures are quite slim.
The proposed development accommodates a number of buildings with differing height and massing. They would be quite visible particularly from close distances in the surrounding area, but I am of the opinion that this visibility would be the result of the location of the industrial estate on a plateau on high ground.
Bearing in mind that the existing site is a brownfield site with a number of dilapidated buildings I consider the proposed development to be acceptable in terms of visual impact. Group planting along the access roads and on the sloping ground to east /south east (facing R314) would be beneficial to reduce the impact. I recommend a condition to that effect.
12.9 Other Issues
12.9.1 One of the serious concerns for the local communities is that the proposed development would be used as an incinerator at a future date. While this is a legitimate concern, such a use would constitute a material change of use and would require planning permission and IPPC license. As such, it would be unreasonable to refuse permission for the proposed development on the basis of possible future conversion to an incinerator at a later date. I would however recommend in the event of a decision to grant permission a condition restricting the fuel mix to be used at the appeal development to those specified in the EIS, i.e. biomass, peat and coal.
12.9.2 The Condition 10 of the decision by the Planning Authority requires closure of the existing access onto Mullafarry Road. It also requires that the construction access which is proposed as a temporary access by the applicants be made permanent.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 75 of 86 Closure of access to Mullafarry Road is appropriate as the said road is quite narrow, and serves some residences.
The temporary access is proposed as a spur from the existing main access to the industrial estate (off R314) and provides access to the southern section of the estate to the rear of the proposed development. It would be appropriate to separate the construction traffic from the main industrial estate traffic during construction.
Though the access is proposed as a temporary construction access, the condition of the planning authority requires it to be permanent. It does not however, give a specific reason for the imposition of such requirement.
During the course of the application and in clarification of the further information request the applicants stated:
As the provision of this road as a permanent access would also have the potential to provide benefit in the long term, Mayo Power would propose to apply for permission to provide this access during the operation of the facility.
The issue of provision of an amenity park on these lands which are stated to be in Council ownership are not a matter for this appeal. However, the said access is proposed only as a temporary construction access by the applicants and is not indicated in the public notice to be a permanent access. It does therefore, require a separate application if and when it is proposed to be used on a permanent basis. I recommend a condition restricting its use as a construction access only.
12.9.3 Concern is raised by some of the submissions that the proposed development would give rise to further developments. The appeal site is located in a semi deserted industrial estate which has the benefit of infrastructure but contains a number of dilapidated structures. Its renewal by way of new development would make use of existing infrastructure put in at considerable public expense and therefore, be in accordance with the sustainable development principles. In any event any further development on the industrial estate would be subject to further planning permission.
12.9.4 Further concerns relate to possible adverse impact on the tourism potential of the area. These are legitimate concerns, as the area has a very pleasant outlook and has a rich cultural and historical heritage. The appeal site is located at some distance from the settlement centres and the coastline and while I do have some reservations regarding the visual impact of the proposed development as stated earlier most of these arise from the location of the industrial estate on a plateau and can be reduced by way of strong planting. I also consider that exclusion of HGV traffic from settlement centres by way of traffic management plans would reduce the impact to acceptable levels.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 76 of 86 13.0 RECOMMENDATION
The proposed development has some positive and some negative aspects. On the positive side it would provide a power station with 100 megawatt capacity which would help redress the existing deficiency while being within the carrying capacity of the existing grid network. Secondly a reasonable portion of the fuel that would be used to generate the electricity would be non- fossil fuels which would be in line with the EU and national policy on security of supply and diversification. Thirdly the proposed combined heat and power plant would be in line with the EU and national policy to increase their contribution. There might be added benefit from the steam produced in attracting new industries which require steam as an input. Fourthly location of the proposed development at this brownfield site to benefit from the existing services would represent a sustainable development.
On the negative side the proposed development would still use a considerable portion of fossil fuels, in particular peat and coal, and their burning as well as their extraction would add to CO2 emissions and remove existing carbon sinks. Secondly supply of the bio energy fuels whether in the form of wood or other bio crops is not guaranteed particularly in view of the fact that some wood would need to be obtained from Coillte with prior commitments elsewhere. It could therefore be depended on incentives to local farmers to switch to bio energy crops. Non availability of supplies from either of these sources would bring the portion of the biomass to be used as fuel drastically down from 40%. While the applicants maintain a guarantee of 25% biomass the letter from the CER refers to 20%. At such a low percentage disadvantages would almost outweigh benefits.
Thirdly, while the applicants proposals to use the ash produced by the proposed development as an input for material production is acceptable, there are no concrete proposals to do so. In any event, this does not cover the entire ash output, and there would still be necessity for disposal to landfill.
There will be implications in terms of nature conservation and sustainability arising from removal of large quantities of peat which is a finite resource. Despite assurances by the applicants that these would be obtained from licensed bogs, I recommend these be obtained by the applicants prior to commencement of development.
There will be impact on the traffic levels in the area but these seem to be within the capabilities of the existing road infrastructure to accommodate them. Nevertheless a Traffic Management Plan specifying haul roads would be appropriate.
There will be some impact on the landscape and visual amenities of the area, but not to an extent to warrant a refusal, and can be further reduced by appropriate screen planting.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 77 of 86 The proposed development would be subject to an IPPC licence, as such the emissions would be controlled by EPA. They would also require a permit for greenhouse gas emissions.
The EIS submitted with the application does have some information deficit, but a number of these have been addressed by way further information and clarification of further information requests by the planning authority. The EIS marks the beginning of the EIA process. I consider the information provided on the main to be adequate for the purposes of making a decision in this case.
Based on the information before me, having regard to the policies in relation to sustainable energy, climate change, habitat protection and proper planning and development of the area, and on balance, I consider the proposed development to be acceptable and recommend that permission be granted subject to following conditions:
REASONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
Having regard to: (a) The National Development Plan, 2007-2013
(b) The national sustainable energy policy as set out in the Government White Paper “Delivering a Sustainable Energy future for Ireland-Energy Policy Framework 2007-2020”, and in the “Bioenergy Action Plan-Report of the Ministerial Task Force on Bioenergy 2007”
(c) The National Strategy on Sustainable Development, 1997
(d) The National Climate Change Strategy 2007-2012
(e) The national Spatial Strategy, which gives priority to improving reliability of electricity supply in north western parts of the Country
(f) Regional Planning Guidelines for the West Region 2004-2016
(g) The policies and objectives of Mayo County Development Plan 2003 and Draft Mayo County Development Plan 2008-2014
(h) The Environmental Impact Statement, the plans particular and all documents submitted to Mayo county Council and to the Board
(i) Location of the site in an established and serviced, but underutilised industrial park
(j) The requirement to obtain an Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Licence from the Environmental Protection Agency and the requirement to obtain greenhouse gas emissions permit
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 78 of 86 it is considered, that the proposed development subject to conditions set out below, would provide an appropriate response to the current energy deficit in the region, would be in accordance with policies to ensure security of supply by enhancing diversity of fuels used for power generation, would be acceptable in terms of carrying capacity of the road network in the area, would not contravene the provisions of National Climate Change Strategy, would not seriously injure or depreciate value of residential property in the immediate vicinity, and would otherwise be in accordance with the policy and objectives of the current Mayo County Development Plan.
CONDITIONS
[General]
1. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the plans and particulars submitted to Mayo County Council on the 30 th day of March 2007, further information submitted on the 13 th day of August 2007 and clarification of further information submitted the 8 th day of November 2007, the Environmental Impact Statement and the mitigation measures contained therein save where amended by conditions attached hereto.
Reason: In the interest of clarity.
2. All structures shall be removed at the expiration of a period of 20 years from the date of commissioning of the development unless planning permission for a further period shall have been granted.
Reason: To enable the planning authority to review the operation of the power station having regard to circumstances then prevailing.
3. The fuel mixed use in the proposed power station would consist only of wood biomass, peat and coal. (a) Prior to commencement of development the applicants shall submit documentary evidence and shall have obtained written confirmation from the planning authority to its satisfaction of minimum 25% wood/biomass content at the start of operations (b) Within three years of commencement of operations the wood/biomass content of the fuel mix shall be no less than 40% of the overall fuel mix used in the operations. (c) No changes in the type or proportions of the fuel mix shall take place without prior grant of planning permission
Reason: To achieve a minimum proportion of renewable fuel in compliance with the national policy.
4. All three streams of fuel mix used as a material input at the power station shall be sourced from sustainable operations. Prior to commencement of development and on a five-yearly basis following commencement of operations, the applicants shall submit to planning authority and shall have obtained written confirmation to its satisfaction, legally binding agreements
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 79 of 86 showing list of companies which would supply peat, and wood at the required quantum from authorised operations in Ireland.
Reason : To ensure that the materials input is sourced from environmentally sustainable operations which comply with EU Directives
5. (a) Prior to commencement of development including site works the applicant shall submit to planning authority and shall have obtained written confirmation to its satisfaction, legally binding agreements showing list of companies which would accept ash from the proposed development as a materials input for the lifetime of the plant (and are authorised to do so). No more than 50% of the ash generated would be diverted to landfill. (b) Prior to commencement of development including site works, the applicant shall submit to the planning authority and shall have obtained written confirmation to its satisfaction, legally binding agreements showing licenced landfills which would accept ash from the proposed development
Reason: To ensure satisfactory disposal of waste in accordance with the national policy on waste.
6. Operation hours which shall be 07.00 - 19.00 Mondays to Fridays and between 08.00 – 16.30 on Saturdays. No construction work on Sundays or Bank Holidays.
Reason: To protect residential amenity
[Roads and traffic]
7. Prior to commencement of development and upon completion of the construction the applicant shall carry out a road and bridge survey in accordance with the requirements of the Mayo County Council. In the event of these surveys being carried out by Mayo County Council this shall be at the developer’s expense.
Reason: To facilitate the determination of damage attributable to the proposed development and to ensure proper maintenance and reinstatement of roads and bridges following construction.
8. Prior to commencement of development the developer shall submit to the planning authority and shall obtain written confirmation to its satisfaction, a construction traffic management plan covering the entire period of construction for agreement in writing.
Reason: In the interest of traffic safety.
9. Prior to commencement of operations the applicant shall submit to planning authority and shall obtain written confirmation to its satisfaction, a traffic
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 80 of 86 management plan indicating the haul routes during the life of operations for agreement in writing.
Reason: In the interest of traffic safety.
10. The boundary details along Mullafarry Road shall be in accordance with the requirements of the planning authority to accommodate passing bays at three locations.
Reason: To improve the capacity of the road and in the interest of traffic safety.
11. The proposed entrance of Mullafarry Road shall be omitted. The construction access shown on Drawing No. GEN/DEF/1129/A submitted on the 8 th day of November 2007 shall be temporary.
Reason: To separate construction traffic and in the interest of traffic safety.
12. The quantum of peat, coal and wood transported to the power station by road shall be monitored on an annual basis and the results submitted to Mayo County Council which shall be made available for public inspection. The maximum quantity of transport by road to the power station shall not exceed quantities specified in the EIS submitted on the 30th day of March 2007 unless a separate planning permission has been secured.
Reason: To minimise impact of heavy goods vehicles on the surrounding road network.
[Site Development, Services and Environmental Management ]
13. Site development standards shall be in accordance with the planning authority’s requirements for such works.
Reason: to achieve a satisfactory standard of development
14. Prior to commencement of development final details of all connections to foul sewers and water mains shall be agreed with Mayo County Council and all connections to foul sewers and water mains shall only be carried out under supervision of Mayo County Council.
Reason: In the interest of public health and proper development.
15. Prior to commencement of development the applicant shall submit a landscaping scheme to the planning authority for written agreement. The landscaping scheme shall include extensive tree planting. The landscaping scheme shall include timescale for implementation and programme for tree planting which shall specify number and species and shall include semi mature specimens. This site shall be landscaped in accordance with figure 7.6.V3
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 81 of 86 contained in the EIS submitted to Mayo County Council on the 30 th day of March 2007.
Reason: In the interest of visual amenities and to screen the proposed development from distant views.
16. The requirements of the Mayo County Council shall be complied with for environmental management systems during the construction phase of the development. The applicants shall appoint a suitably qualified and experienced environmental officer who shall report to the planning authority as and when required.
Reason:
17. Prior to commencement of development a project monitoring committee shall be established to monitor surface water run-off, drainage control, traffic management and road maintenance and all environmental issues during the period of construction. The committee shall comprise of two representatives of the developer, two representatives of Mayo County Council and an invitation shall be extended to the North West Regional Fisheries Board and Environmental Protection Agency to provide one representative each for the committee. In addition two representatives of the local community shall be invited to serve on the committee. The Environmental Officer shall report to the project monitoring committee.
Reason: In the interest of proper environmental control during the construction phase.
18. Prior to commencement of development the developer shall submit to the planning authority for written agreement details of a monitoring plan in relation to surface water, groundwater, dust and continuous noise from the date of commencement or works on site to the date of commissioning of the power station.
Reason: In the interest of clarity and protection of the environment during the stage prior to commissioning or operations.
19. Any activity that will result in a significant increase in the ambient noise levels shall be notified to Mayo County Council in advance and shall be made available to the general public by way of public advertisement.
Reason: In the interest of public health and residential amenity.
20. Dust levels shall not exceed 350 mg/m². (TA Luft air quality standards) per day averaged over 30 days when measured at the site boundaries. Any activity which could reasonable be expected to exceed at dust level and proposed mitigation measures shall be notified to Mayo County Council in advance and shall be made available to general public by way of public advertisement.
Reason: In the interest of public health and residential amenity.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 82 of 86
21. No waste material other than material being transferred to a licensed waste facility generated on the site during the construction phase shall be removed off site without the prior agreement of Mayo County Council.
Reason: To provide for the appropriate management of waste and particular recyclable materials in the interest of protecting the environment.
22. Prior to commencement of development the developer shall submit for the written agreement of Mayo County Council details for the management of waste and in particular recyclable materials within the development including the provision of facilities for the storage separation and collection of waste and in particular recyclable materials and for the ongoing operation of these facilities.
Reason: To provide for the appropriate management of waste.
23. Within 12 months of the date of this permission a detailed programme for the decommissioning of the power station and rehabilitation of the site shall be submitted to Mayo County Council for written agreement.
Reason: To ensure satisfactory decommissioning of the project.
[Landscaping]
24. Prior to commencement of development the applicant shall submit a landscaping scheme to the planning authority for written agreement. The landscaping scheme shall include extensive tree planting. The landscaping scheme shall include timescale for implementation and programme for tree planting which shall specify number and species and shall include semi mature specimens. This site shall be landscaped in accordance with figure 7.6.V3 contained in the EIS submitted to Mayo County Council on the 30 th day of March 2007.
Reason: In the interest of visual amenities and to screen the proposed development from distant views.
[Archaeology]
24. The developer shall facilitate Mayo County Council in preserving, recording or otherwise projecting archaeological materials or features that may exist within the site. In this regard a developer shall
(a) notify the Mayo County Council in writing at least four weeks prior to the commencement of any site operation (including hydrological and geotechnical investigations) relating to the proposed development,
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 83 of 86 (b) employ a suitably qualified archaeologist which shall monitor all site investigations and site development works.
(c) provide satisfactory arrangement for the recording and removal of any archaeological material which may be considered appropriate to remove. The archaeologist shall be responsible for reporting any finds without delay to Mayo County Council. In such event works shall cease in the effected area and shall not recommence until such time as mitigation measures (if any) agreed with Mayo County Council have been carried out and
(d) submit a report to Mayo County Council detailing the results of the monitoring.
Reason: In order to conserve the archaeological heritage of the site and to secure preservation of any remains which may exist within the site.
[Financial Contributions]
26. The Developer shall pay to the planning authority a financial contribution of €90,675.00 (ninety thousand six hundred and seventy five euro) in respect of public infrastructure and facilities benefiting development in the area of the Planning Authority that is provided or intended to be provided by or on behalf of the authority in accordance with the terms of the Development Contribution Scheme made under section 48 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The contribution shall be paid prior to the commencement of development or in such phased payments as the planning authority may facilitate and shall be subject to any applicable indexation provisions of the scheme at the time of payment. The application of an indexation required by this condition shall be agreed between the planning authority and the Developer or in default of such agreement the matter shall be referred to the Board to determine.
Reason: It’s a requirement of the Planning and Development Act 2000 that a condition requiring contribution in accordance with the Development Contribution Scheme made under section 48 of the act be applied to the permission.
27. The developer shall pay the sum of €124,100 (one hundred and twenty four thousand one hundred euro) (updated at the time of payment in accordance with changes in the Wholesale Price Index – Building and Construction (Capital Goods), published by the Central Statistics Office), to the planning authority as a special contribution under section 48 (2)(c) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 in respect of the cost of expenditure which the Council has or may incur in respect of the provision of road strengthening, provision of passing bays and improvement of the junction between the local road L-1111 – 13 and the Regional Road R314 and for the provision of a right hand turning lane onto the regional road which facilitate the proposed development. Together with a sum equal to the cost of acquisition of land required for the construction of the passing bays. Payment is subject to provisions of section 48(12) of the Planning and Development Act 2000. This contribution shall be
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 84 of 86 paid prior to the commencement of the development or in such phased payments as the planning authority may facilitate. The application of indexation required by this condition shall be agreed between the planning authority and the developer or, in default of such agreement, the matter shall be referred to the Board to determine.
Reason: It is considered reasonable that the developer should contribute towards the specific exceptional costs which are incurred by the planning authority which are not covered in the Development Contribution Scheme and which will benefit the proposed development.
29. The developer shall pay the sum of €10,400 (ten thousand four hundred euro) (updated at the time of payment in accordance with changes in the Wholesale Price Index – Building and Construction (Capital Goods), published by the Central Statistics Office), to the planning authority as a special contribution under section 48 (2)(c) of the Planning and Development Act 2000 in respect of the cost of expenditure which the Council has or may incur in respect of road improvements in the area which will facilitate the proposed development and repair of damage to the road network resulting from the development. Together with a sum equal to the cost of acquisition of land required for the construction of the passing bays. Payment is subject to provisions of section 48(12) of the Planning and Development Act 2000. This contribution shall be paid prior to the commencement of the development or in such phased payments as the planning authority may facilitate. The application of indexation required by this condition shall be agreed between the planning authority and the developer or, in default of such agreement, the matter shall be referred to the Board to determine.
Reason: It is considered reasonable that the developer should contribute towards the specific exceptional costs which are incurred by the planning authority which are not covered in the Development Contribution Scheme and which will benefit the proposed development.
30. The developer shall pay to the planning authority a financial contribution of €18,000 (eighteen thousand euro) in respect of community facilities benefiting the development in the area of the planning authority that is provided or intended to be provided by or on behalf of the authority in accordance with the terms of the Development Contribution Scheme made under section 48 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. The contribution shall be paid prior to the commencement of development or in such phased payments as the planning authority may facilitate and shall be subject to any applicable indexation provisions of the Scheme at the time of payment. The application of any indexation required by this condition shall be agreed between the planning authority and the developer or, in default of such agreement, the matter shall be referred to the Board to determine.
Reason: It is a requirement of the Planning and Development Act 2000 that a condition requiring a contribution in accordance with the Development Contribution Scheme made under section 48 of the Act be applied to the permission.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 85 of 86
31. Prior to commencement of development, the developer shall lodge with the planning authority a cash deposit, a bond of an insurance company, or other security to secure the provision and satisfactory completion and maintenance until taken in charge by the planning authority of roads, footpaths, watermains, drains, public open space and other services required in connection with the development, coupled with an agreement empowering the planning authority to apply such security or part thereof to the satisfactory completion or maintenance of any part of the development. The form and amount of the security shall be as agreed between the planning authority and the developer or, in default of agreement, shall be referred to the Board for determination.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory completion of the development.
[Completion, Decommissioning and Reinstatement]
32. Within two years of commencement of operation of the plant, the developer shall submit to the planning authority [Louth County Council] for written agreement, detailed plans and proposals for plant decommissioning and the restoration and reinstatement of the entire site following de-commissioning of the plant. The restoration works shall be completed within two years of the closure of the plant.
Reason: To ensure satisfactory restoration of the site in the interest of the amenities of the area and proper planning and control.
33. Prior to commencement of development, the developer shall lodge with the planning authority a cash deposit, a bond of an insurance company, or other security to secure the decommissioning of the plant and reinstatement of the site in accordance with the plan agreed under Condition 15 above, coupled with an agreement empowering the planning authority to apply such security or part thereof to the satisfactory new statement of any part of the development. The form and amount of the security shall be as agreed between the planning authority and the developer or, in default of agreement, shall be referred to the Board for determination.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory reinstatement of the development.
______Öznur Yücel-Finn
Senior Planning Inspector
June, 2008.
------PL16.227487 An Bord Pleanala Page 86 of 86