DOCSLIB.ORG

Roosecote Biomass Report PDF 177 KB

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Roosecote Biomass Report PDF 177 KB PART I South Lakeland District Council PLANNING COMMITTEE Meeting Date: 25 October 2012 Report Author: Mark Shipman (Development Management Group Manager) Eleanor Huddleston, Planning and Enforcement Assistant Portfolio: Jonathon Brook (Housing and Development Portfolio Holder) Report from: David Sykes (Director People and Places) Wards affected: All in the Furness Peninsula Key Decision: Not applicable A REPORT ON THE SUBMISSION OF A LOCAL IMPACT REPORT TO THE NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE DIVISION REGARDING ROOSECOTE BIOMASS POWER STATION AT BARROW IN FURNESS 1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 This report is presented to inform Members about the draft Local Impact Report to be submitted to the National Infrastructure Division of the Planning Inspectorate (NID) and allow Members to comment thereon. 1.2 Appendix 1 contains the Draft Report. 2.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 It is recommended that Members of Planning Committee:- (1) Consider the report and suggest any revisions they wish to be incorporated; and (2) Endorse the report for submission to the NID. 3.0 BACKGROUND 3.1 The application seeks a Development Consent Order (DCO) to construct and operate a 90MW (gross) / 80MW (Net) biomass electricity generating power station on land at Roosecote, Barrow in Furness. 3.2 The main structures proposed comprise: a boiler house 70m high; a stack 90m high; a fuel storage shed 29m high, up to 120m x 55m in plan; four fuel storage silos for wood pellets each 25m in diameter and 35m tall; biomass screening building; road delivery unloading facility; rail unloading facility; a railway line connecting the existing rail infrastructure; and conveyors to transport fuel within the power station. The site of the proposal is approximately 1.2 kilometres from the boundary with South Lakeland. The nearest village within the District is Leece, which is approximately 1.9 km from the application site. There are many rural communities of varying sizes within a 5 km radius from the site which fall within two parishes, Aldingham and Urswick. 3.3 The Planning Act 2008 created the Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) and this has been changed into the National Infrastructure Division of the Planning Inspectorate by the Coalition Government. Their function is to issue all the necessary consents in one process for significant national infrastructure projects. There are thresholds set for energy production that define Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects. Roosecote Biomass Power Station is defined as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project. 3.4 Section 60 (2) Planning Act 2008 states “The Commission must give notice in writing to each of the following, inviting them to submit a local impact report to it:- (a) each authority which, in relation to the application, is a relevant local authority within the meaning given by section 102(5), and (b) the Greater London Authority if the land to which the application relates, or any part of it, is in Greater London.” South Lakeland District Council is a relevant authority under subsection (a). 3.5 Section 60 (3) Planning Act 2008 states a “local impact report” is a report in writing giving details of the likely impact of the proposed development on the authority’s area (or any part of that area).” Local Impact Reports are referred to using the acronym LIR. 3.6 A guidance Note was produced by the IPC and is still the relevant document. The following advice is taken from that document: The content of the LIR is a matter for the local authority concerned as long as it falls within this statutory definition. Topics which may be of assistance in the report include: • site description and surroundings / location; • details of the proposal; • relevant planning history and any issues arising; • relevant development plan policies, supplementary planning guidance or documents, development briefs or approved master-plans and an appraisal of their relationship and relevance to the proposals; • relevant development proposals under consideration or granted permission but not commenced or completed; • local area characteristics such as urban and landscape qualities and nature conservation sites; • local transport patterns and issues; • site and area constraints; • designated sites; • socio-economic and community matters; • consideration of the impact of the proposed provisions; • requirements within the draft Order (such as the scheme) in respect of all of the above; and • development consent obligations and their impact on the local authority’s area. 3.7 This list is neither exhaustive nor prescriptive. Local authorities should cover any topics they consider relevant to the impact of the proposed development on their area. 3.8 Local authorities should set out clearly their terms of reference for the LIR. The LIR should be used by local authorities as the means by which their existing body of local knowledge and evidence on local issues can be fully and robustly reported to the Commission. 3.9 There is no need for the LIR to replicate the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Nor is it necessary to replicate any assessment already produced in respect of the site such as those included in National Policy Statements. Rather, it should draw on existing local knowledge and experience. Examples might be local evidence of flooding, local social or economic issues or local knowledge of travel patterns to community facilities. 3.10 In producing a LIR, the local authority is not required to carry out its own consultation with the community. 3.11 The report should consist of a statement of positive, neutral and negative local impacts, but it does not need to contain a balancing exercise between positives and negatives; nor does it need to take the form of a committee report. The Commissioner will carry out a balancing exercise of relevant impacts, and these will include those local impacts specifically reported in the LIR . 3.12 By setting out clearly evaluated impacts in a structured document, local authorities will assist the Commission to identify local issues which might not otherwise come to its attention in the examination process. It will also be very helpful to have the local authority’s appraisal of the proposed development’s compliance with local policy and guidance. 3.13 It would assist the Commission if the local authority is able to give its view on the relative importance of different social, environmental or economic issues and the impact of the scheme on them. 3.14 It will be important for the Commission to have the local authority’s views on provisions, requirements and development consent obligations. Where specific mitigation or compensatory measures are proposed by the applicant, by way of suggested provisions; requirements; or development consent obligations, these should be identified, commented upon and given appropriate weight. Local authorities should mention them explicitly. The same applies to provisions; requirements; and obligations that the local authority considers ought to be included. 3.15 Parish councils, organisations and members of the public may have made representations to the local authority or directly to the applicant about the scheme (prompted, for example, by the applicant’s consultation). The LIR could include reference to these representations, but only where they are relevant to a particular local impact which the local authority itself wants to highlight. To make relevant representations about the application, interested persons must register their interest with the Commission at the appropriate time. Local authorities should therefore encourage such respondents to register their interest so that they can make representations about the scheme directly to the Commission. 3.16 The draft LIR is contained in Appendix 1. 4.0 RESEARCH AND CONSULTATION 4.1 Various planning files both within South Lakeland Local Planning Authority, Barrow Local Planning Authority and Cumbria County Council, Consultation Documents and application documents submitted to the NID. See below. 5.0 PROPOSAL 5.1 Submit the Local Impact Report to the National Infrastructure Division. 6.0 ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS 6.1 Not submit the Local Impact Report to the National Infrastructure Division. 7.0 NEXT STEPS 7.1 Incorporate any comments of Members and if appropriate subsequent relevant observations of Cumbria County Council, then submit the LIR to the NID. 8.0 IMPLICATIONS 8.1 Financial and Resources 8.1.1 No planning fee is received and SLDC is not a party to the Planning Performance agreement, though a pre-application fee of £600 plus VAT was received. 8.2 Human Resources 8.2.1 The recommendations in this report do not have any staffing implications. 8.3 Legal 8.3.1 See report. 8.4 Social, Economic and Environmental Impact 8.4.1 Has a sustainability impact assessment been carried out? Yes. The Appendix to this report does comment on environmental effects. 9.0 RISK ASSESSMENT Risk Consequence Controls required Not submitting the LIR will Ombudsman Ensure submission of mean that the decision maladministration the LIR within the regarding Roosecote investigation. Result in relevant timescale. Power Station will be taken inappropriate forms of without regard to impacts development, which could within South Lakeland have an adverse impact on Local Planning Authority the character, and administrative area. appearance of the District’s town and rural landscapes. 10.0 EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY 10.1 The Planning Act 2008 takes account of the equalities issues in seeking to define South Lakeland’s community and interests relevant to the Local Development Plan, which will influence the determination of this Development Consent by the NID. 11.0 LINKS TO THE CORPORATE PLAN AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 11.1 This report links to the aim of “Enhancing the environment in which we live.” 12.0 CONCLUSION AND EXPECTED OUTCOMES 12.1 Officers conclude that it is unlikely that there will be a significant adverse impact on landscape and visual amenity within South Lakeland. However, there are still issues to be addressed with regards to air quality and traffic and transport which do have implications for the District given the proximity of the site to South Lakeland, and the location of main transport routes through the District.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 01 STA Cover 2007
    15-28 STA Listings 2007 21/2/07 2:37 PM Page 15 THE SOURCE TESTING ASSOCIATION THE STA MEMBERSHIP 3M UK Aerosol Industrial Station Road, Coleshill ALcontrol On-Site Services Ian Clarkson Research Group Birmingham B46 1JY Trevor Worrall 3M Centre, Cain Road, Bracknell Cristina Gutiérrez-Cañas T: 0800 917 1313 Templeborough House, Mill Close Berkshire RG12 8HT Maria Diaz de Haro 68 F: 01675 467022 Rotherham, South Yorkshire T: 01344 857801 Bajo Pab 3-4-5, Portugalete [email protected] S60 1BZ [email protected] Bizakaia 48920, Spain www.uk.airliquide.com T: 01709 841028 www.mmm.com T: (+34) 944 723597 F: 01709 841079 F: (+34) 944 723604 Air Monitors [email protected] A-Plus Consulting [email protected] James Mills www.alcontrol.co.uk Graham Clarke www.aerosolirg.com Unit 2, The Hawthorns 35 Holmesdale Road, Dronfield Pillows Green Road, Staunton Derbyshire S18 2FA AES Gloucestershire GL19 3NY T: 01246 410256 Mark Elliott T: 01452 849111 [email protected] Northumberland Dock Road F: 01452 849112 Wallsend, Tyne & Wear NE28 0QD [email protected] T: 0191 2968500 www.airmonitors.co.uk Anchem Laboratories F: 0191 2968560 Gethyn Jones [email protected] Air Products Unit 5a, Darcy Business Park www.aes-labs.co.uk Dr Gary Yates Darcy Way, Llandarcy, Neath 2 Millennium Gate, Westmere Drive SA10 6EJ ABB AES Kilroot Power Crewe, Cheshire CW1 6AP T: 01792 323223 John Kelly Stephen Fleming T: 01270 614227 F: 01792 323236 Hortonwood 37, Telford, Shropshire Larne Road, Carrickfergus F: 01932 258622 [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • Agecroft in Steam
    ( ?I ~- - - ~"~ _., -- ........... / -- . , ·--....., __ t) \ ,-- The 1960's saw a dramatic change m the use of The 'A' station system was abandoned early m steam locomotion in the North West of 1947 as construction of 'B' station cooling to Cl!Jton Junc1:c'n ) England. Within the short space of 8 years the towers severed the line. Between then and its QI✓ . familiar sight of a steam-hauled train closure the 'A' station received coal by road. {not all 1he rm,ways shown exi~ad al the some time vanished completely from British Rail. For a A Stallon .,:· :·, ,: ' _::' .·. ·-~ ·.. while steam continued to be used at some ·'..,·.'. _. 1, · ,_ c · ·n... c····. ~:·y···,--·· Reception Sidings industrial sites in Lancashire but now only II AG hopper Agecroft Power Station, near Manchester, .if •i•>,c': fp , ' . ,. Ill ·• continues the tradition. Three power stations (A, B and C ) have been A completely ne w coal handling system using developed on the Agecroft site smce 1925 and steam locomotives, was built on a separate each has used a rrnl system in its coal site· to se rve···•· both 'B ' and 'C' stations. A senes of handling. lines, approximately I mile lung, was coalslockmg construc ted running from the original gmundwilh ,:···. ~ ~ -c·,.' .-:B.ft. .,. ....:;: y ·:·:· conveyor to Agecroft Junc tion. The line passed crone lrack (standard gmrgel -.. ~~:: .. ·~&--... 2 loco sheds and fanned into wagon sidings ,,,. .-n:v ...' ... which converged lo pass through the tippler. .. .. A new conveyor was built to take the coal over . .. ... the British Rail line and the canal to the power The original 'A' statio,n used a 2' 6" gauge station.
    [Show full text]
  • 2008 Corporate Responsibility Report Centrica Plc Corporate Responsibility Report 2008
    2008 Corporate responsibility report Centrica plc Corporate responsibility report 2008 www.centrica.com/cr08 Contents 3 Chief Executive’s introduction 4 Assurance and scope 5 Excerpt from Corporate Citizenship’s Assurance Statement 6 2008 Highlights 7 Business overview 8 Our approach 14 CR Committee and Governance 17 Business principles 22 Key Performance Indicators 25 Key impact areas 26 Climate change and the environment 44 Customer service 56 Securing future energy supplies 64 Health and safety 72 Employees 83 Supply chain 87 Local impact 92 Our stakeholders 94 Customers 97 Investors 99 Employees 101 Suppliers and business partners 103 Governments and regulators 105 Communities 107 NGOs and consumer organisations 109 Media 110 Trade unions 111 Appendix – Memberships 2 Centrica plc Corporate responsibility report 2008 www.centrica.com/cr08 Chief Executive’s introduction Introduction from Sam Laidlaw 2008 was my first full year as a member of the Corporate Responsibility Committee. Throughout the year, the Committee challenged our current performance and debated areas of future activity across a range of critical business issues. Through this continual process of improvement, I have confidence that we are making good progress in developing the necessary structures and processes, allied to a management commitment that will build a sustainable and environmentally aware business for the future. In this report, you can read about our initiatives and performance over the year, as well as our forward- looking plans for 2009 and beyond. As our CR programmes mature, there is an increasing amount of available information to present to our internal and external audiences. As in previous years, we have chosen to use the online environment to report.
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Response to the North West Coast Connections Route Corridor Consultation – Appendix 1
    PROPOSED RESPONSE TO THE NORTH WEST COAST CONNECTIONS ROUTE CORRIDOR CONSULTATION – APPENDIX 1 PURPOSE OF APPENDIX The purpose of this Appendix is to set out the proposed response of SLDC to the National Grid North West Coast Connections Route Corridor Consultation 1 General comments 1.1 SLDC broadly supports the preferred option – Onshore South with Tunnel. 1.2 The preferred option includes a tunnel under Morecambe Bay from close to Heysham to the Rampside area and then broadly follows the existing 132kV Electricity North West power line northwards through the Furness peninsula to Broughton in Furness and then up the West Coast of Cumbria, much of which will be removed and replaced by a smaller number of larger 400kV pylons. 1.3 The preferred option, in the main, avoids the significant impacts to South Lakeland communities that would be incurred if other alternative options, such as Onshore South, were implemented. 1.4 However, SLDC’s support for the preferred option is subject to consideration of the remaining concerns and needs for mitigation detailed below. 2 Section H1 (South eastern Furness) 2.1 The preferred tunnel route is proposed to surface slightly inland in the area between Roosebeck and Rampside. SLDC considers that locating the convertor stations at the points where the cable surfaces as close to the existing energy infrastructure at Roosecote Power Station as possible (as indicated by the larger blue hatched polygon in the consultation material) would indeed be preferable. It would have the least impact on social, environmental and economic factors, including landscape, impacts on local communities and tourism.
    [Show full text]
  • Roosecote (Barrow)
    DEVELOPMENT CONTROL AND REGULATIONS COMMITTEE 02 October 2012 A Report by the Assistant Director Planning and Sustainability _____________________________________________________________________________ Reference No: EN010044 Applicant: Centrica RPS Limited, Maidenhead Road, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 5GB District: Barrow Borough Council ______________________________________________________________________ Proposal: To consider a joint Cumbria County Council/Barrow Borough Council Local Impact Report relating to an application for a Development Consent Order (DCO) to enable the applicant to construct and operate a new Biomass electricity generating station with a nominal capacity of 90MW, together with a number of associated developments Location: Land at Roosecote, Barrow-in-Furness ______________________________________________________________________ 1.0 RECOMMENDATION 1.1 To approve the joint Cumbria County Council/Barrow Borough Council prepared Local Impact Report, as set out in Annex A, and to refer it to Cabinet and for Cabinet to make representation about whether the Council supports the proposal or not, taking account the Local Impact Report agreed by DC&R. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On the 3 rd July 2012, Centrica RPS Limited submitted an application for a Development Consent Order (DCO) to the National Infrastructure Directorate (Planning Inspectorate) to build and operate a 90MW (gross)/80MW (Net) biomass electricity generating power station on land at Roosecote, Barrow-in-Furness. 2.2 As the biomass facility is an on-shore electricity generating station having a capacity of more than 50MW, it is deemed a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) within the definition contained in Sections 14 & 15 of the Planning Act 2008, as amended. The application for the DCO will therefore be determined by the Secretary of State, via the National Infrastructure Directorate (Planning Inspectorate).
    [Show full text]
  • Modified UK National Implementation Measures for Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading System
    Modified UK National Implementation Measures for Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading System As submitted to the European Commission in April 2012 following the first stage of their scrutiny process This document has been issued by the Department of Energy and Climate Change, together with the Devolved Administrations for Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. April 2012 UK’s National Implementation Measures submission – April 2012 Modified UK National Implementation Measures for Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading System As submitted to the European Commission in April 2012 following the first stage of their scrutiny process On 12 December 2011, the UK submitted to the European Commission the UK’s National Implementation Measures (NIMs), containing the preliminary levels of free allocation of allowances to installations under Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading System (2013-2020), in accordance with Article 11 of the revised ETS Directive (2009/29/EC). In response to queries raised by the European Commission during the first stage of their assessment of the UK’s NIMs, the UK has made a small number of modifications to its NIMs. This includes the introduction of preliminary levels of free allocation for four additional installations and amendments to the preliminary free allocation levels of seven installations that were included in the original NIMs submission. The operators of the installations affected have been informed directly of these changes. The allocations are not final at this stage as the Commission’s NIMs scrutiny process is ongoing. Only when all installation-level allocations for an EU Member State have been approved will that Member State’s NIMs and the preliminary levels of allocation be accepted.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 Corporate Responsibility Report
    2010 Corporate responsibility report Introduction and approach Contents 2 Chief Executive’s introduction 11 Governance 3 Approach and governance Centrica Executive Committee An Integrated business and CR strategy Corporate Responsibility Committee 4 Our CR strategy Performance 2010 Energy for a low carbon world 12 Looking ahead 8 Risk management 13 Assurance and reporting 9 Materiality 14 Scope of report 10 Stakeholder engagement Key stakeholder groups Prioritising stakeholders 2010 Corporate responsibility report: Introduction and approach 1 Chief Executive’s introduction In last year’s corporate responsibility (CR) report I discussed the changing shape of our business and how we responded by developing a new CR strategy. In 2010 we have focused on implementing that strategy and pursuing opportunities that lead the drive to a low carbon world. I am delighted to present our 2010 CR Report, which sets out our progress during the year and addresses some of the challenges that we face. Our new CR strategy has given us a better framework for our through energy efficiency and behaviour change, and on activities, with an emphasis on identifying ways in which providing additional support to our most vulnerable customers. Centrica can reduce carbon emissions. This is a role we are uniquely placed to fulfil through our customer relationships, the What is apparent is that we cannot achieve our low carbon skills of our service engineers and our expertise in sourcing goals in isolation. In September 2010, I set out what I believe energy and generating power. There are significant new market is needed from the industry, government and consumers to opportunities in helping to deliver a low carbon society; building achieve a low carbon economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Permits.Pdf
    Variation notice with introductory note Environmental Permitting (England & Wales) Regulations 2007 Roosecote Power Station Centrica RPS Limited Rampside Road Barrow-in-Furness Cumbria. LA13 0PQ Variation notice number EPR/BM4406IU/V002 Permit number EPR/BM4406IU Roosecote Power Station Permit Number EPR/BM4406IU Introductory note This introductory note does not form a part of the permit The following notice, which is issued pursuant to regulation 20 and Part 1 of Schedule 5 of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations S.I.2007 No. 3538 (the Regulations), gives notice of the variation of an environmental permit to operate a regulated facility. The permit variation is that the installation boundary is to be amended to include the above ground installation (AGI). This is adjacent to the existing installation boundary and was previously considered to be part of the gas supply system operated by National Grid but responsibility for the AGI has now passed to Centrica. Schedule 1 of this notice lists any deleted conditions, Schedule 2 lists any amended conditions and Schedule 3 lists any conditions that have been added. The status log of a permit sets out the permitting history, including any changes to the permit reference number. Status Log of the permit Detail Date Response Date Application BM4406IU Duly made 29/03/2006 Additional Information Received 29/11/2006 Permit determined 19/12/2006 Variation EA/EPR/BM4406IU/V002 05/10/2009 Additional Information Received 07/10/2009 16/10/2009 Variation EPR/BM4406IU/V002 determined 20/10/2009 End of Introductory Note Variation number EPR/BM4406IU/V002 Page 1 - - - 1 - - 1 -1 Notice of variation Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2007 Permit number EPR/BM4406IU The Environment Agency in exercise of its powers under Regulation 20 of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2007 (SI 2000 No 3538) varies the permit as set out below.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Options Report for the North West Region Oct 2012
    North West Coast Connections Project Strategic Options Report for the North West Region 19 October 2012 Issue 2, version 0.00 National Grid National Grid House Warwick Technology Park Gallows Hill Warwick CV34 6DA Table of Contents 1 Introduction .......................................................................................... 1 2 Background ........................................................................................... 5 3 The Need for Reinforcement in the North West Region ................................ 9 4 New Transmission Routes - National Grid’s Approach ................................ 15 5 Strategic Options Identified for the North West Region ............................. 21 6 Appraisal of Strategic Option 1: Twin South Onshore ................................ 26 7 Appraisal of Strategic Option 2: Twin South Offshore................................ 42 8 Appraisal of Strategic Option 3: Cumbria Ring Onshore South ................... 54 9 Appraisal of Strategic Option 4: Cumbria Ring Offshore South ................... 71 10 Appraisal of Strategic Option 5: Twin North + North-South .................... 87 11 Appraisal of Strategic Option 6: Twin North + East-West ..................... 104 12 Integrated Offshore Alternative ........................................................ 120 13 Results of Initial Comparative Appraisal of Strategic Options ................ 123 14 Conclusions ................................................................................... 140 Appendix A – Summary of National Grid’s
    [Show full text]
  • Mr Tony Jarvis
    Mr Tony Jarvis - Head of Thermal Power Our ref: NO/2012/103343/01-L01 Projects Your ref: 111108 Centrica Plc Millstream Maidenhead Road Date: 29 March 2012 Windsor Berkshire SL4 5GD Dear Mr Jarvis ROOSECOTE BIOMASS POWER STATION, SECTION 42 CONSULTATION ROOSECOTE POWER STATION IN BARROW IN FURNESS Thank you for referring the Section 43 Consultation on the above proposals, which we received on the 16 February 2012. We have the following comments to make. Flood Risk There are areas within the application site such as parts of the rail link which are located within the indicative tidal flood plain, the area of which is based on the approximate extent of floods with a 0.5% annual probability of occurrence. Hydrology and Flood Risk has been covered within the Preliminary Environmental Information (Ref OXF7339) dated February 2012. We recommend that the sequential approach be undertaken, where practicable, within an application boundary. This ensures that the more vulnerable parts of a development are sited in areas at least flood risk. It is understood that this approach is being used within the site for example with the fuel handling facilities which are located in flood zone 1. Section 7.7.2 states that the rail route is typically between 6.3 and 6.5m AOD. Section 7.9.8 states that the proposed rail route would be flooded to a depth of around 100mm during a 1 in 200 year event based on tidal data provided. However this does not appear to include an allowance for climate change and freeboard. The applicant should be aware that the tidal levels that we provide are based on astronomical tides approximately 2km off the coastline and do not take into account wave action / tidal surge.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter to David Cameron MP
    Leader of the Council The Courts English Street CARLISLE Cumbria CA3 8NA Fax 01228 607403 Tel 01228 227394 Email [email protected] Our Ref: ETM/KCS Date: 5th October 2010 The Rt Hon David Cameron MP Prime Minister House of Commons London SW1A 0AA Dear As the Conservative Leader of Cumbria County Council, I appreciate and endorse the actions that the coalition government must take to reduce the national deficit. It is also entirely apposite to undertake a comprehensive defence review and that you consider such matters in the light of the overall UK budget and the UK’s defence commitments both at home and abroad. I am also aware that you appreciate how important both submarine and surface vessel building is to Barrow, to south Cumbria and, indeed, to the defence of the nation. County Councillors from across Cumbria, and of all political persuasions, have unanimously agreed to give full support to plans to secure a prosperous future for Barrow and the Furness area. Barrow has suffered in the past because of its comparative isolation. It is ironic, perhaps, that cutting-edge manufacturing and the latest forms of energy are underpinning the modest turnaround in the area’s fortunes; this marks Barrow out from other regenerating towns that have relied on financial services and the retail sector to underpin their economies. Barrow shipyard is one of the largest in the United Kingdom (having constructed well over 800 vessels in its history). The port of Barrow itself is heavily involved with the transportation of natural gases and other forms of energy from local sites such as Sellafield, Barrow Offshore Windfarm, Ormonde Wind Farm, Rampside Gas Terminal and Roosecote Power Station.
    [Show full text]
  • UK's Dash for Gas
    Department of War Studies strategy paper fourteen paper strategy UK’s Dash for Gas: Implications for the role of natural gas in European power generation Alexandra-Maria Bocse & Carola Gegenbauer 2 UK’s Dash for Gas: Implications for the role of natural gas in European power generation EUCERS Advisory Board Professor Michael Rainsborough Chairman of the Board, Dr John Chipman Director of the International Institute Head of War Studies, King’s College London for Strategic Studies (IISS), London Marco Arcelli Executive Vice President, Upstream Gas, Iain Conn Group Chief Executive, Centrica plc Enel, Rome Professor Dr Dieter Helm University of Oxford Professor Dr Hüseyin Bagci Department Chair of International Professor Dr Karl Kaiser Director of the Program on Relations, Middle East Technical University Inonu Bulvari, Transatlantic Relations of the Weatherhead Center Ankara for International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School, Andrew Bartlett Managing Director, Bartlett Energy Advisers Cambridge, USA Volker Beckers Chairman and non-Executive Director Frederick Kempe President and CEO, Atlantic Council, of Reactive Technologies Ltd, Vice Chairman (since Washington, D.C., USA October 2016) and Member of the Board of Directors Thierry de Montbrial Founder and President of the Institute (non-Executive Director) of Danske Commodities A/S, Français des Relations Internationales (IFRI), Paris Denmark and Chairman, Chair Audit Committee of Albion Community Power Plc Chris Mottershead Vice-Principal (Research & Development), King’s College London Professor
    [Show full text]