CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY PERFORMANCE REVIEW 2012 INTRODUCTION – Chief Executive’S Introduction 2
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Option 1 - Net Gain)
Annex I4 Direct impacts arising from individual Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) (Option 1 - Net Gain) 1 Introduction 1.1.1 This annex sets out the direct impacts of each of the Net Gain recommended Marine Conservation Zones (rMCZs) being proposed only for designation in Option 1 of the Impact Assessment. 1.1.2 Four sets of tables are provided for each rMCZ as follows: • Table 1 – sets out an ecological description of the site, and specifies what ecological features are to be protected by the rMCZ and their conservation objectives; • Table 2 – sets out the cost impacts of the rMCZ by sector. • Table 3 – lists the sectors that have activities currently occurring within or near to the rMCZ but for which no mitigation is required and therefore no cost impacts are anticipated. • Table 4 – sets out the contribution to the Ecological Network Guidance undertaken by the Statutory Nature Conservation Bodies (SNCBs) • Table 5 – sets out the beneficial impacts to ecosystem services of the rMCZ 2 Impact Assessment 2.1.1 The remainder of this document sets out the individual rMCZ and rMCZ Reference Area assessments. 1 rMCZ NG 1b, Orford Inshore Site area (km2): 71.95 • This site has been proposed for designation under Policy Option 1 only. Table 1. Conservation impacts rMCZ NG 1b, Orford Inshore 1a. Ecological description The site is of high importance as a nursery and spawning ground for fish species, including Dover sole, sprat, lemon sole and sand eel. Skate, ray, crustacean and dogfish are also present; recommended Marine Conservation Zone (rMCZ) NG 1b may be used by foraging sea bird species such as the red- throated diver. -
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] -
A Theoretical Framework for Improving Energy Justice in the UK
Watching the Wind Blow By: A Theoretical Framework for Improving Energy Justice in the UK Rupert Cope Bournemouth University Faculty of Science and Technology the award for which the degree of Masters by Research (MRes) is submitted in partial fulfilment of its requirements Submitted September 2018 Copyright Statement This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is understood to recognise that its copyright rests with its author and due acknowledgement must always be made of the use of any material contained in, or derived from, this thesis. 1 | P a g e Abstract For over thirty years the Brundtland’s Commission’s definition has been widely accepted as the general definition of what sustainable development is. However, there is increasing academic discourse suggesting that aspects of the Brundtland’s definition are inadvertently limiting the potential of contemporary sustainability from the perspectives of both horizontal and vertical actors both nationally and internationally. Through a lack of a clear measuring tool of what effective sustainable development is under Brundtland’s definition, differing interpretations (either deliberately or subconsciously) can be made leading to competing interests between the environmental, economic and social pillars of the based on the interpreter’s subjective interests. Using an overarching definition of SD that overlooks or simplifies varying wants and needs of individuals and groups within a single society this can result in the production of unbalanced policy measures. These unbalanced policies then hamper significant advancement of sustainable technology implementation as they fail to adequately reflect these varied and competing needs. The UK is demonstrating such scenarios in which the skewed application of sustainable development is creating growing numbers of injustice. -
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. -
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. -
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. -
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). -
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. -
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. -
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. -
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. -
ENERGY - Some Macro and Micro Aspects of Spatial Planning1
ENERGY - Some Macro and Micro Aspects of Spatial Planning1 I. INTRODUCTION (i) Scope Policy approaches to the finding, generation and conservation of energy are enormous in scope. The issues which touch upon the policy approaches are global in nature and are significant drivers of international political events. Energy security is a primary consideration of all western governments and is a significant factor in political stability in developing countries and of course, in the oil producing countries. Likewise, questions of food security are closely related to fossil fuel availability and price. Political and social unrest in respect of both environmental and economic consequences of energy and food security issues has been evident in recent years. Moreover, the policy drivers in respect of energy generation and conservation are intimately and closely linked to policy measures to address climate change. If there were one word which was most appropriate to start a discussion on how to ‘put the world to rights’, then “energy” might be that word. In this paper I seek to set out something of the broad context which gives rise to a range of domestic policy approaches which materially and significantly affect land use in planning decisions. I seek to identify the range of impacts which energy related policies have upon planning decisions and then identify the present position and trends in respect of energy generation and design. 1 Paper published in the journal of the United Kingdom Environmental Law Association, May 2011 2 (ii) Context - Economic Growth and Sustainable Development The tension between economic growth and development which is sustainable has long been identified2.