centrica rps limited roosecote biomass power station, … · document reference 6.4 centrica rps...

Document Reference 6.4

Centrica RPS Limited Roosecote Biomass Power Station, Roosecote, Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria Environmental Statement Non Technical Summary Prepared on behalf of Centrica RPS Limited by RPS Planning & Development and Pöyry Energy Limited June 2012

RPS Planning & Development Pöyry Energy Limited Mallams Court Century House 20 -Milton Park 100 Station Road Abingdon Horsham Oxon West Sussex OX14 4SH RH13 5UZ

RPS Centrica RPS Limited Poyry

Roosecote Biomass Power Station June 2012 Non Technical Summary OXF7339

Contents 1 Introduction 2 The Site and its Surroundings 3 The Proposed Development 4 Approach to the Assessment 5 Air Quality and Odour 6 Water Quality 7 Hydrology and Flood Risk 8 Land Quality 9 Ecology 10 Ornithology 11 Landscape and Visual 12 Archaeology and Cultural Heritage 13 Traffic and Transport 14 Noise and Vibration 15 Waste Generation 16 Social and Economic Effects 17 Aviation and Telecommunications 18 Consultation and Next Steps

Figures Figure 1 Proposed Development Consent Order Boundary Figure 2 Roosecote Biomass Power Station – Proposed Layout Figure 3 Port facilities – Proposed layout Figure 4 Roosecote Biomass Power Station - Indicative Colour Scheme



Members of the public and other stakeholders can obtain further information on Centrica RPS Ltd and the project proposals by:

• Logging onto the dedicated project website at www.centrica.com/roosecotebiomass

• Emailing: [email protected] • Writing to: Centrica RPS Ltd, Maidenhead Road, Windsor,

Berkshire, SL4 5GD



1

1 Introduction 1.1 Centrica RPS Limited is preparing an application for a Development

Consent Order (DCO) to develop a biomass power station with a net output of 80MW of electricity at the site of its existing operational gas-fired Roosecote Power Station near Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria. This report is the Non Technical Summary of the Environmental Statement (ES) which has been prepared for submission with the application for the DCO.

1.2 The evolving scheme has been informed by the EIA process so that environmental issues were taken into account at an early stage of the project. This has enabled measures to minimise likely environmental effects and enhance beneficial effects to be incorporated within the scheme.

1.3 The inter-relationship between the architectural, landscape and visual aspects of the proposed power station has been particularly important to ensure that the proposals develop in a way which reflects the surrounding landscape, settlements and views from key viewpoints.



2

2 The Site and its Surroundings The Site 2.1 The proposed Roosecote Biomass Power Station is located at the site of

Centrica’s existing operational Roosecote Gas–fired Power Station approximately 600m to the south east of Barrow-in-Furness, Cumbria. A plan showing the proposed boundary of the DCO is shown in Figure 1.

2.2 The proposed boundary includes the following areas of land required for developing the project in the following ways: • Land required for construction of new facilities:

o Roosecote power station site (proposed biomass power station). o Ramsden Dock (proposed new berth, including areas requiring

dredging, fuel handling and storage, and rail loading facilities) o Land between Salthouse Junction and the proposed power

station (proposed new rail link from the power station to connect with the existing railway serving Ramsden Dock).

o Power station access road (minor improvement works). • Land required for access during operation:

o The existing railway from Salthouse Junction to Ramsden Dock o Cavendish Dock Road

• Land required for construction compounds, laydown, prefabrication and site offices: o Land in the east of the Roosecote power station site o Land in the west of the Roosecote power station site o Land at Salthouse Mills o Land to the east of Salthouse Mills o Land at Ramsden Dock

• Land required for access during construction: o Cavendish Dock Road o The road serving Salthouse Mills beneath the existing railway

(known locally as Salthouse Road). o The road/pathway along the south of Cavendish Dock. o The road/pathway along the east of Cavendish Dock. o The road/pathway between Roosecote Power Station and the

cooling water pump house at the south east corner of Cavendish Dock.



3

2.3 The power station site was previously occupied by a coal-fired power station built by the Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB) in 1954, which operated until it closed in 1986. The site was acquired from the CEGB in 1989, and the current gas-fired power station started commercial operation in November 1991. Prior to construction of the coal fired station the site was open land (Roosecote marshes and sands), part of which was used as a rifle range.

2.4 There are two main elements of the existing Roosecote Power Station. These are the main power station site and the cooling water pump house which is located adjacent to Cavendish Dock, with the associated pipelines to the power station. The cooling water pump house is located at the south eastern corner of Cavendish Dock, from which point a concrete dividing structure extends around 600m into the dock providing a barrier between the abstracted and returned cooling water.

The Surroundings 2.5 Immediately to the north west of the power station is United Utilities’

Barrow-in-Furness Wastewater Treatment Plant. To the south of the power station are Centrica’s Morecambe Bay Gas Terminals.

2.6 The nearest residential properties are at Dowie Close some 400m to the north of the power station site. New House Farm is some 500m to the north east of the site. There are extensive allotment gardens at Roose Farm some 600m north of the site. Barrow-in-Furness town centre is some 2.3km north west of the power station site.

2.7 In the locality of the power station site there are a number of areas of special interest: • Roosecote Sands to the west of the power station site is part of the

internationally designated Morecambe Bay Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar Site, and part of the South Walney and Piel Channel Flats Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

• Cavendish Dock is part of the SPA and Ramsar Site and part of the South Walney and Piel Channel Flats Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), as well as being part of the ‘Cavendish Dock Wildlife Attraction’.

• Salthouse Pool, between Cavendish Dock and the power station, is designated as a County Wildlife Site and also part of the ‘Cavendish Dock Wildlife Attraction’.

• The Duddon Estuary SPA and Ramsar Site (Duddon Estuary SSSI) are beyond Barrow-in-Furness to the north west. The Duddon Estuary SSSI is also included n the Morecambe Bay SAC.



4

2.8 Bow Bridge, some 3km north of Roosecote Power Station, is the nearest Scheduled Ancient Monument. Furness Abbey, also a Scheduled Ancient Monument, is just beyond Bow Bridge to the north-west.

2.9 A footpath/cycleway, a Public Right of Way (PROW), runs north-south along a former railway along the western boundary of the power station and is part of the Cumbria Coastal Way. There is also a footpath/cycleway around the eastern edge of Cavendish Dock linking to this and to the footpath/cycleway along the Cavendish Dock sea wall. These are permissive routes and form part of the ‘Cavendish Dock Trail’. There is a further PROW some 300m to the north of the power station site connecting Rampside Road with the Cumbria Coastal Way.



5

3 The Proposed Development Key Characteristics of the Scheme 3.1 The proposed layout of the biomass power station is shown in plan on

Figure 2. Centrica RPS Limited proposes to retain and re-use some of the existing infrastructure from the gas-fired power station including the water treatment plant, the cooling water pump house and pipework. The plan indicates the existing buildings which would be retained, and the new buildings and structures which would be built at the power station site.

3.2 The main new structures which are indicated on the figure would be: • a new boiler house 70m high; • a new stack 90m high; • a new fuel storage shed some 29m high and up to 120m x 55m in

plan; • four new fuel storage silos for wood pellets each some 25m in

diameter and some 35m tall; • biomass screening building; • road delivery unloading facility (for emergency deliveries only); • rail unloading facility; • a new railway line connecting to the existing rail infrastructure; and • conveyors to transport fuel within the power station.

3.3 Approximately 430,000 to 600,000 tonnes of biomass fuel (comprising a mix of virgin wood chip and pellets, with a proportion of recycled/waste wood chips), would be burnt per annum to generate electricity at the facility. This range is based on the indicative cases which have been considered as the basis of the assessment of the likely environmental impacts of the operation of the power station as follows: • 100% wood pellet; • 50% wood pellet and 50% virgin wood chip; and • 50% wood pellet and 50% recycled/waste wood.

3.4 It is possible that the fuel mix could vary outside these indicative cases depending on future supply and operational requirements. Throughputs of fuel of up to 630,000 tonnes per annum would not affect the conclusions regarding environmental effects in the ES. For this reason a Requirement has been included in the draft DCO limiting the total quantity of fuel per annum to 630,000 tonnes.

3.5 It is also possible that markets in other biomass fuel may develop which may mean that the types of fuel could change in the future. If this was



6

the case then acceptance of other types of biomass fuel would be by agreement with the Local Planning Authority through a Requirement of the DCO.

3.6 The power station would meet all relevant current legislation including the EC Waste Incineration Directive (WID) and the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations. The Environmental Permit to be issued by the Environment Agency (EA) will require that the plant is designed and constructed using proven and Best Available Technology (BAT). Stack Emissions

3.7 The flue gas treatment system would clean the flue gases before release to the atmosphere and would comprise NOx abatement, acid gas neutralisation, heavy metals adsorption and particulate filtration components. Continuous on-line emissions monitoring equipment would monitor the performance of the flue gas treatment system and warn of trending toward the emission limits, thus enabling timely corrective action. The reporting mechanism would be agreed with the EA while drafting the Environmental Permit. Transport

3.8 The fuel would be delivered to the power station either by sea to the Port of Barrow (and then by train to the power station), or alternately from another UK port and then by train via the rail network.

3.9 The proposals include development of a new berth and fuel storage and handling facilities at the port and a new rail link from the proposed power station to the existing line which serves the Port of Barrow.

3.10 Depending on the source of fuel up to three ships per week would deliver fuel to the Port of Barrow. Also depending on the source of fuel, up to seven trains per day would deliver the fuel to the power station.

3.11 The removal of waste products is likely to be by road, although the option of removal by rail is being considered. Generation of waste products including ash is expected to be 50-85 tonnes/day. Sand consumption would be approximately 6 to 12 tonnes/day and limestone consumption 2 to 5 tonnes/day. Transport of the ash and process materials would result in up to 10 HGV movements per day (5 in and 5 out). Dust Control

3.12 Wood pellets can be a source of dust emissions; this very fine dust is produced especially during transit. All conveyers and transfer points would be enclosed with appropriate dust filters. All train unloading would take place within a purpose built enclosed building also fitted with appropriate dust controls and filters. All dust collected at the dust filters would be combusted in the boiler.



7

3.13 The detailed design of the dust suppression equipment will depend on the equipment supplier, but the specification for the fuel handling equipment requires that the receiving hoppers be equipped with an effective dust control system to minimise the escape of dust during the grab discharge cycle. The silos must be equipped with dust extraction and filtration equipment of sufficient capacity to comply with all emission and environmental regulations. The dust filter elements must be capable of being changed while the plant is on-line. The condition of the elements would be monitored by continuous measurement of the pressure drop across the filter.

3.14 At the Port of Barrow vessels would be unloaded using either clamshell or orange peel type grabs. These completely encase the product and prevent the egress of dust and the ingress of moisture. The discharge hoppers would be equipped with extraction fans and filtration to prevent dust creation.

3.15 Once the fuel has been unloaded it would be transferred to the buffer stores via means of belt conveyors housed in enclosed galleries. This enclosure of the conveyor together with the slow belt speed and vacuum systems at the head of each conveyor would mitigate dust creation in this area.

3.16 Buffer storage would be achieved by means of silos which were selected over A-frame type sheds due to their containment properties. Like the discharge hoppers, the silos would be equipped with extraction fans and filtration to prevent the escape of dust into the environment.

3.17 Fuel loading would take place within a building which wiould be equipped with extraction fans and filtration. Once loaded the rolling stock would be sealed and therefore there is no possibility of dust being liberated during transportation to the power station. Water Usage, Treatment and Disposal

3.18 Cooling water would be pumped from Cavendish Dock and returned to the dock using the existing pump house and delivery and discharge pipes. Approximately 300,000m3/day of cooling water would be required. This would require no change to the current abstraction and discharge consents held by the Power Station since water use would not exceed the current consented limit of 346,000m3.

3.19 Process water is currently supplied from the mains and this would continue. Prior to use in the boiler, the water would be treated by a demineralisation plant using the existing water treatment facilities.

3.20 Water for domestic use would continue to be supplied from the mains supply and foul sewage would continue to be discharged to the local sewer.



8

Hours of Operation 3.21 The biomass power station would generate electricity 24 hours a day, 7

days per week. It would operate continuously throughout the year except during shutdowns for maintenance or unplanned outages.

3.22 It is anticipated that the rail movements would be restricted to a 13 hour period (8am – 9pm) Monday to Saturday. Unloading of trains at the power station would continue between 9pm and 11pm, but would not involve the use of diesel locomotives. Sunday deliveries would only be required in the case of emergencies, or to clear any backlogs at the port if space was required for an imminent fuel delivery.

3.23 Deliveries and movement of HGVs would be between 6am and 11pm Monday to Friday and 7am to 5pm on Saturday.

Site Staff 3.24 During operation, in excess of 50 full time operational and maintenance

staff are expected to be employed, working a combination of shift and day time hours.

Project Stages 3.25 Subject to approval, construction is anticipated to commence in the third

quarter of 2013 and would have a duration of some 26 months. Following a 6 month period of commissioning and testing the biomass power station would become fully operational in the first quarter of 2016.

3.26 The power station would have a minimum design life of approximately 20 years, although it is possible that, with good maintenance and replacement of equipment, the operational life could be extended considerably beyond this.

Construction 3.27 A Code of Construction Practice (CoCP) has been prepared and then

subsequently, prior to construction, a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) will be produced. The CoCP sets out the proposed construction mitigation measures to be adopted to minimise adverse effects on the environment during the build phase.

3.28 Construction materials would be generally transported by road. There is the potential for some materials and components to be transported by sea or rail to the Port of Barrow. . Delivery from the Port of Barrow to the site would be by road. Construction routes would be agreed with the Local Highway Authority in advance.

3.29 It is anticipated that some 500 construction jobs would be created at Roosecote Power Station during the peak construction period.



9

4 Approach to the Assessment 4.1 The purpose of the EIA is to assess the likely significant environmental

effects of the proposed development applied for in the DCO. This includes development at the power station site, the development required at the Port of Barrow and the construction of the rail link to the power station. The EIA also assesses the impacts of the operation of the facilities.

4.2 The likely significant effects are assessed in comparison with the current baseline which includes the existing situation with the operational Roosecote Gas-fired Power Station, and the future baseline situation. In this case the existing baseline is at 2012 with the existing station operating and the future baseline date is 2017, i.e. once the new Roosecote Biomass Power Station would be operational. Assumptions have been made about any other consented significant developments, or developments likely to be consented and built by that date. In the local area this includes the United Utilities stormwater storage facility which is currently under construction to the north of the power station.

4.3 The cumulative effects on receptors in the vicinity of the scheme as a result of the proposed Roosecote Biomass Power Station together with other major developments proposed in the area have been assessed including the allocated sites for large scale development in the Barrow Port Area Action Plan. These are the Marina Village development, the Waterfront Business Park and the potential residential development at Salthouse Mills, all of which are in the vicinity of Cavendish Dock. There are also planning permissions for a 9MW pyrolysis plant for electricity generation at the Port of Barrow and for development associated with the Gateway Gas Storage Project to the south of the existing gas terminals.

Alternatives 4.4 The ES includes a section outlining the alternatives that have been

considered including: • Fuel choice; • Alternative designs and layouts within the power station site; • Alternative designs and layouts at the Port of Barrow; • Alternative means for delivery of fuel to the power station by

conveyor or rail from the Port of Barrow; • Alternative solutions for the disposal of wastes such as bottom ash,

fly ash and flue gas residues; and • Provision for Combined Heart and Power (CHP).



10

Choice of Fuel 4.5 The types of fuel which are to be utilised at the Roosecote Biomass

Power Station are virgin wood chip, virgin wood pellets and recycled/waste wood chip.

4.6 Since a range of options for the fuel mix is possible, for the purposes of the ES the following scenarios have been considered which represent the range of possible mixes: • 100% wood pellet. • 50% wood pellet and 50% virgin wood chip. • 50% wood pellet and 50% recycled/waste wood.

4.7 As explained in Chapter 3, it is possible that the fuel mix could vary outside these indicative cases depending on future supply and operational requirements. Throughputs of fuel of up to 630,000 tonnes per annum would not affect the conclusions regarding environmental effects in the ES.

4.8 It is also possible that markets in other biomass fuel may develop which may mean that the types of fuel could change in the future. If this was the case then acceptance of other types of biomass fuel would be by agreement with the Local Planning Authority. Alternative Combustion Technologies

4.9 In considering the most appropriate combustion technology for this project, the scope has been restricted to proven technologies that are known to be capable of reliably delivering efficient generation of electricity. This has resulted in Circulating Fluidised Bed (CFB) being the selected boiler technology. The height of the boiler house (70m) is dictated by the height of the furnace which provides the minimum 2 seconds residence time in the furnace required by the Waste Incineration Directive (WID).

4.10 Further detailed design work is ongoing and will continue once a supplier is appointed to ensure that the efficiency of the process is maximised and that the plant makes sustainable use of the resources. Alternative Designs and Layouts within the Power Station Site

4.11 The site layout is largely defined by the need for the new boiler house to be adjacent to the turbine hall, the need to retain the cooling and process water supply and treatment facilities, the requirement for a large area for the storage of fuel, and the particular requirements of rail, and road transport.

4.12 Careful consideration has been given to the visual appearance of the proposed power station, particularly the colour scheme for the boiler house and the other large structures. The opinion of the public on a number of alternative schemes was sought at the public exhibitions in



11

November 2011 and March/April 2012. The Design Council has also being consulted.

4.13 The indicative colour scheme which responds to the surrounding landscape, and which has been developed based on consultation, is shown on Figure 4. Alternative Designs and Layouts at Barrow Port

4.14 The requirements of ship berthing and unloading, fuel storage, and transport from the Port of Barrow to the power station by rail define the requirements for layout of the new facilities at the Port of Barrow. In consultation with Associated British Ports (ABP) (the port operators and owners) two main alternatives were considered: i) Use of an existing berth in the Dock Basin at the entrance to

Ramsden Dock; or ii) Construction of a new berth just inside the entrance to Ramsden

Dock between the innermost lock gates and the International Nuclear Services facility.

4.15 For operational reasons construction of the new berth was adopted as the best option. It avoids any potential obstruction of the dock entrance which may have been the case if ships were berthed at the existing berth at the west end of the port. Alternative Means for Delivery of Fuel to the Power Station

4.16 Two potential rail links were considered to connect to the Network Rail main line and to the Port of Barrow; one following the selected west facing link to Salthouse Junction, and the other an east facing link to join the main line just to the west of Roose Station. Consideration was also given to two options for a conveyor to transport fuel from Port of Barrow Port to the power station; either along the causeway forming the south wall of Cavendish Dock; or around the western and northern margins of the dock.

4.17 The west facing link is by far the most flexible rail solution as it provides for rail access from both the main line and the docks, and avoids the need for rigid timetabling of the shuttle trains as they would run entirely off the main line between the docks and the power station. This was also the favoured option at the public exhibition in November 2011.

4.18 Since the west facing link provides for transport of fuel from both the port and the main line, there is no requirement for a conveyor from the port.

4.19 It is clear that construction of the western rail link has considerable benefits both in terms of operational flexibility and removing the need for significant additional development which would be required if any other option was adopted. This results in a significant reduction in the overall environmental effects of the project as a whole. Therefore the conveyor options and the eastern rail connection were dropped.



12

4.20 Consideration was given to the construction of a bridge at the north east corner of Cavendish Dock as an alternative to localised infilling but was found to be not practical for construction, maintenance and inspection reasons. Alternative Solutions for the Disposal of Wastes such as Bottom Ash and Flue Gas Residues

4.21 In the UK, flue gas treatment residues are normally taken offsite for disposal at a suitably licensed landfill site. Transport from the site would be in sealed HGVs. The option of removal of waste products by rail is also being considered.

4.22 The bottom ash would be screened on removal from the furnace, with all fine material recycled to the sand silo. Larger items would be sent to a skip for removal off site. In total the bottom ash would only make up a relatively small percentage of the waste produced by the site. It is likely this would be disposed of to landfill although options for recycling/sale of ash are being considered.

4.23 The boiler fly ash has potential uses as fertilizer, in manufacture of construction materials, and in road surfacing products. It can also be used for neutralizing acid wastes from the chemical industry, and as a binding agent for certain waste materials. Provision for Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

4.24 Consideration has been given to the possibility of supplying heat to neighbouring users. A study was commissioned and it concluded that use of the waste heat would only be achievable if a major industrial or horticultural heat load moves into the area. The power station will be designed to be CHP ready so that should such a potential heat user be identified in the future, there would be the opportunity to utilise the heat off-take provided, and hence improve the overall energy efficiency of the plant.



13

5 Air Quality and Odour 5.1 The proposed facility will be designed to minimise emissions from the

stack using Best Available Techniques (BAT) and to treat any residual emissions by flue gas treatment prior to their release. The emissions would comply with the limits specified in the European Union (EU) Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) which incorporates the WID and requires adherence to emission limits for a range of pollutants.

5.2 The existing Roosecote gas-fired power station operates under a permit granted in 2006 by the EA under the Pollution Prevention and Control (England & Wales) Regulations 2000 (Permit Number BM44061U). Existing air quality in the vicinity of the proposed power station has been established following a review of local and national government monitoring and data sources along with monitoring undertaken by the Centrica Gas Terminal. Site specific monitoring was also undertaken as part of the project.

5.3 The proposed biomass power station would operate under a variation of the same permit. In addition, because the plant would be utilising recycled/waste wood as a fuel, the emissions would comply with the limits specified in the EU IED which incorporates the WID and requires adherence to emission limits for a range of pollutants.

5.4 During operation of the biomass power station the principal source of atmospheric emissions would be residual levels of pollutants exhausted from the stack after treatment in the flue gas treatment (FGT) system. Detailed atmospheric dispersion modelling has been undertaken to predict the effects of the operation of the proposed development on ground level pollutant concentrations at selected sensitive receptors.. A grid of receptor locations, including sensitive ecological sites over a radius of 15 km was selected. On the basis of the dispersion modelling completed for the site design, a 90 metre stack has been determined as being appropriate to minimise ground level pollutant concentrations.

5.5 The modelling showed that with a stack height of 90m predicted contributions of all pollutants considered would be well within current air quality objectives and limit values for health. The assessment of the effects of air quality on ecological interests is referred to in section 9.

5.6 Road, ship and train emissions have been considered in the air quality assessment and no significant impacts are predicted due to the proposals in isolation or in combination with emissions from the exhaust stack.

5.7 Wood pellets are a potential source of dust emissions; this very fine dust can be produced especially during transit. The measures which would be implemented to prevent emissions of dust, both at the power station and at the port, are described in section 3 above.



14

5.8 During construction, the principal concern would be the potential generation of dust and associated nuisance that may arise. The CoCP includes measures to minimise potential effects on air quality during construction. The potential effects from construction activities at the site have been assessed based on the London Best Practice Guidelines for Construction Dust. Implementation of dust management and the application of good-housekeeping measures would ensure that the effects would be effectively controlled.



15

6 Water Quality 6.1 The effects on water quality during the construction, operation and

decommissioning of the power station have been assessed. A desk study of relevant legislation, guidance, water quality data and technical reports and maps has been undertaken to identify sensitive receptors and assess the effects on water quality.

6.2 Existing abstractions and discharges for the Roosecote gas-fired power station site from/to water resources and features in the vicinity of the site are presently licenced through permits. This is to ensure the impact of the site operations on water quality is acceptable. The existing limits on abstraction and discharge of cooling water using Cavendish Dock have formed the basis of the design of the proposed biomass power station. The cooling water infrastructure at Cavendish Dock would remain unchanged and it would continue to operate under the same conditions as the existing station.

6.3 Measures are proposed as part of the CoCP, to manage the construction activities of the proposed development and minimise the potential surface and groundwater pollution risks during construction. This includes: Good practice measures for storage of fuel and chemicals on site, in

accordance with EA guidance and relevant legislation; Any runoff water or groundwater seepage that collects in the

foundations would be collected and treated where necessary prior to discharge into local drains or ditches. Temporary consents would be sought from the Environment Agency for these activities. Discharges to groundwater would not be permitted without prior agreement of the Environment Agency.

A project Spillage Response Plan would be developed and implemented. It would set out systems to ensure that potential effects of pollution upon sensitive receptors (e.g. humans, land and water) are contained and minimised and that clean-up procedures and spill kits are in place to respond effectively in the event of an incident.

6.4 The construction of the new berth within Ramsden Dock would involve dredging of the new berth area, piling and backfilling. A detailed method statement for the dredging would be developed and authorised through a deemed Marine Consent included in the DCO. This will ensure minimal sediment disturbance and appropriate disposal of dredgings.

6.5 The proposed Sustainable Drainage Strategy (SUDS) would include pollution control measures. Oil interceptors would be incorporated into the drainage design to aid the removal of oils/lubricants from surface water discharged to Salthouse Pool.



16

6.6 The existing site pollution control and emergency procedures would be updated to reflect the changes associated with the new operation. They would be implemented accordingly to minimise any risk of a water pollution incident arising during the operation of the new biomass power station.

6.7 The proposed delivery of fuel by sea would result in an increase in ships entering the Port of Barrow. These movements and associated fuel handling processes would be covered by the existing ABP Emergency Response Plan, defining procedures for spillages, fires and other emergencies.

6.8 The effects on water quality during the construction, operation and decommissioning of the development have been assessed and no significant adverse effects have been identified.



17

7 Hydrology and Flood Risk 7.1 A desk study of relevant legislation, guidance and technical reports and

maps has been undertaken to identify sensitive receptors and assess the effects on hydrology and flood risk.

7.2 The flood zone mapping identifies that the main power station site is located within fluvial and tidal flood zone 1. The northern margins of the site are located within an area that may be at risk of flooding from the Cavendish Dock reservoir, should it fail and release the water it holds. The whole of the proposed rail link is considered to be within fluvial flood zone 1 or above fluvial flood levels. The tidal flood map shows that the majority of the rail route is within tidal flood zone 1, except for where tidal flood zone 3 extends over the area within the vicinity of the connection to the existing train line close to the north eastern corner of Cavendish Dock. The rail route also passes through an area that may be at risk of flooding should the Cavendish Dock reservoir fail. The area of the Port of Barrow where the new berth and fuel handling facilities would be built is within fluvial and tidal flood zone 1.

7.3 The flood risk from all sources to the main power station site is generally considered to be low. The fluvial or tidal flood risk within the vicinity of the proposed railway link route is moderate.

7.4 A SUDS for management of the surface water has been incorporated into the scheme. This includes attenuation of drainage from the proposed new building roof areas and hard standing areas prior to controlled discharge to Salthouse Pool to the west of the site. The rate of release of water would be controlled to minimise the risk of flooding downstream. It has been designed to ensure that the runoff entering the existing drainage network from the new building roof areas and hard standing areas is restricted to greenfield runoff rate up to the 1 in 100 year storm event (with a 20% allowance for climate change).

7.5 The building slab levels are to be raised marginally above surrounding ground levels and surrounding hard surfaced areas would slope slightly away from the building. This would ensure surface water flooding from surrounding areas does not affect buildings.

7.6 In order to minimise the risk of surface water flooding during construction, the work to construct the drainage infrastructure would be programmed early in the construction programme. Temporary drainage channels, lagoons and siltation ponds would be used where necessary. This requirement is included in the CoCP, which sets out the measures Centrica RPS Ltd would require its contractors to adopt and implement during construction of the proposed development.

7.7 The marginal infilling of Cavendish Dock associated with the construction of the new rail line includes infilling within the fluvial floodplain of an area of no more than 50m2. The flood risk assessment



18

has considered this and concludes that the flood risk implications of any potential resulting loss in floodplain storage to the site and surrounding areas would be indiscernible.

7.8 The effects on hydrology and flood risk throughout the construction, operation and decommissioning of the development have been assessed. With the incorporation of mitigation measures, no significant adverse effects of the proposed power station on hydrology and flood risk throughout its lifecycle have been identified.



19

8 Land Quality 8.1 The potential for existing ground contamination at and in the vicinity of

areas proposed for development have been assessed, as have the potential risks associated with contamination during the construction, operation and decommissioning of the proposed power station.

8.2 A desk-based review was carried out of historical land uses on the site and the immediate surrounding area to assess the potential for ground contamination. The environmental setting was also reviewed to identify any receptors that may be sensitive to potential contamination.

8.3 The Roosecote site was formerly occupied by a coal-fired power station, which was commissioned in the 1950s. Prior to this, the site was used as a rifle range, with the eastern part of the site used for sand extraction. Pulverised Fuel Ash (PFA) from the power station was deposited in the south of the site and along the western boundary. There are also a number of old landfills within the site boundary and to the immediate south. The permitted waste types were restricted to PFA and inert wastes. The area of the former ash lagoons is currently occupied by the neighbouring gas terminal.

8.4 An area in the east of the site (in the vicinity of the visitors’ car park) was used to strip asbestos from the old coal boilers. Most of the asbestos was taken off-site, but the area was encapsulated with inert waste and soil as a precaution.

8.5 One of the proposed laydown areas to the north of the power station is a former gas works. The laydown area at Salthouse Mills was formerly occupied by a paper mill.

8.6 British Geological Survey (BGS) records show that the majority of the Power Station site is underlain by tidal flat deposits. The access road and proposed lorry park are underlain by sand and gravel and the area to the west/north west of the site is underlain by alluvium.

8.7 The solid geology underlying the site is the Sherwood Sandstone group, comprising red, yellow or brown sandstone with subordinate mudstone and siltstone. The bedrock is classified as a Principal Aquifer, however the site is not located within a Source Protection Zone.

8.8 A geophysical survey of the proposed power station site and the western rail link option has been undertaken to characterise shallow ground conditions, in particular locating underground structures and foundations. Following on from this survey, a combined geo-environmental and geotechnical investigation is in progress.

8.9 The construction, operational and decommissioning effects of the proposed power station on ground conditions and geological resources have been assessed. Appropriate measures have been identified to prevent adverse effects of existing ground conditions and further



20

contamination of land during the construction, operation and decommissioning of the proposed power station.

8.10 On the main power station site, in areas where piling is proposed, only limited concentrations of contaminants were encountered during the investigation. No remediation is required.

8.11 The site investigation has encountered some evidence of asbestos fibres. Where landscaping is proposed in these areas, appropriate barrier techniques would be used to prevent mobilisation of any potential contamination.



21

9 Ecology 9.1 The likely effects of the proposed biomass power station and associated

infrastructure have been assessed on sites designated for their nature conservation importance, and legally protected and notable habitats and species of flora and fauna.

9.2 Roosecote Sands to the west of the site is part of the internationally designated Morecambe Bay Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar Site. Cavendish Dock is part of the SPA and Ramsar Site. Both Roosecote Sands and Cavendish Dock are part of the South Walney and Piel Channel Flats Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). Further to the west is the Duddon Estuary which is an SSSI, SPA and Ramsar Site. The Duddon Estuary SSSI is also included in the Morecambe Bay SAC. Salthouse Pool between Cavendish Dock and the power station is designated as a County Wildlife Site. Cavendish Dock and Salthouse Pool together form the ‘Cavendish Dock Wildlife Attraction’.

9.3 An assessment of the potential impacts of air emissions took into consideration all statutory designated sites (SACs, SPAs, Ramsar Sites, SSSIs and NNRs) up to 15 km from the proposed development. Modelling the predicted impacts of air emissions from the biomass power station indicates no significant impacts on statutory designated conservation sites within this area. Nitrogen and acid deposition would have some adverse effects on the ecology of non statutory designated County Wildlife Sites.

9.4 Cavendish Dock is an enclosed dock with a unique ecology influenced by discharge of cooling water from the existing Roosecote gas-fired power station. A beneficial effect of the proposed power station would be the maintenance of the temperature regime of Cavendish Dock which would help to maintain the unique ecology of the dock.

9.5 The majority of the new power station would be constructed on the site of the existing power station. The area to be developed consists of a mixture of hard-standing, amenity grassland, species-poor semi-improved grassland and gorse scrub.

9.6 Part of the proposed rail route crosses the north-eastern corner of Cavendish Dock which would require infilling by placement of rock-fill. The overall loss of open water following infilling equates to 0.01 ha of the surface of the coastal lagoon habitat which is some 0.017% of the 59ha area.

9.7 Measures are proposed as part of the CoCP to minimise the potential impact on the ecological habitats and species of the site and its surroundings. Specific measures are proposed to protect the aquatic environment, including measures related to the proposed dredging at



22

Ramsden Dock, and the infilling and extension of the culvert at Cavendish Dock.

9.8 Otters are known to use parts of the development area but construction is not predicted to disturb any resting sites. A pre-construction survey would be required to establish whether an outlier badger sett, about 20m from the development boundary, is in use. If so the need for temporary exclusion of badgers from this sett under licence would be considered. Removal of common lizards and other reptiles from some construction areas would be required prior to works commencing. Any stands of Japanese knotweed likely to be damaged or disturbed during work would need to be removed and disposed of.

9.9 Four sites have been identified for use as temporary construction laydown areas, including areas of semi-improved grassland and scrub. The proposed landscape strategy includes planting of scrub habitat to offset the potential loss of these areas.

9.10 The landscaping strategy also includes the development of a landscaped bund with shrub planting along the western margin of the power station site.



23

10 Ornithology 10.1 The Morecambe Bay SPA/Ramsar site and the Duddon Estuary

SPA/Ramsar site support internationally important concentrations of waterbirds and breeding seabirds. Important numbers of some waterbirds feed and roost within Cavendish Dock and Roosecote Sands. The proposed development area was found to support a range of breeding birds that is typical of scrub and grassland habitats that have developed on brownfield land. The breeding bird assemblage included eight species of high conservation concern.

10.2 Any significant effects on birds would be avoided through a combination of best practice and mitigation. Best practice would be adopted to avoid disturbance to nesting birds, while lost breeding bird habitat would be replaced elsewhere on site. Measures have been developed to mitigate any potential disturbance or displacement of the important bird species of the SPA/Ramsar sites. This includes timing of construction in sensitive areas to avoid periods when concentrations of wintering and migrating birds are present, visual screening of the power station construction site along the frontage with Roosecote Sands and managing the warm water outflow to Cavendish Dock. With these measures in place, it is predicted that no significant impacts on any important ornithological feature would result from any stage of the biomass power station project.

10.3 As referred to in the Ecology section above, the cooling water regime of the existing Roosecote Power Station has beneficial effects on the ecology of Cavendish Dock by promoting the growth of beaked tasselweed. This in turn has benefits for estuarine birds including SPA qualifying species. The proposed biomass power station would continue to provide this warm water discharge to Cavendish Dock.

10.4 Measures are proposed as part of the CoCP, to manage the construction activities of the proposed development. This would minimise the potential impact on species that use the site and its surroundings, including nesting birds. Specific measures are proposed to minimise the disturbance on estuarine birds in the closest parts of the Morecambe Bay SPA/Ramsar site including reducing both the visual and noise disturbance. The noisiest activity likely to be associated with the construction work at Ramsden Dock would be percussive piling. This would only take place over the period April to September avoiding the main wintering period for estuarine birds.

10.5 The infilling of the small section of the northeast corner of Cavendish Dock would take place between June and August (when the lowest number of birds are present in Cavendish Dock) to minimise disturbance.



24

10.6 The proposed landscape strategy includes planting of scrub habitat to provide habitat for locally breeding birds in order to offset the potential loss of nesting habitat.

10.7 The landscaping strategy also includes the development of a landscaped bund with shrub planting. This would screen all or most of the activity taking place within the proposed site and thereby minimising the visual disturbance of waterbirds across Roosecote Sands.



25

11 Landscape and Visual Effects 11.1 The assessment has considered the potential landscape and visual

effects of the proposed biomass power station. The scope and extent of the assessment, as well as the identification of key landscape and visual receptors, was based on consultation with Barrow-in-Furness Borough Council, Cumbria County Council and the Lake District National Park Authority. This resulted in an agreed study area extending 10km from the site of the proposed biomass power station. Additional viewpoints in the Lake District National Park and the Arnside and Silverdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty beyond this were also considered.

11.2 Consideration was given to alternatives for the proposed rail link between the port and the power station, and between the main line railway and the power station. During early consultation, an east facing rail route was proposed, that would cut across the old railway embankment to the north of the power station site and then run along a decline to the power station site. This would have required significant build up of the rail route with consequent visual impact and noise to properties which would be close to this link. This option would also have required a conveyor from the Port of Barrow. Two options were considered for a conveyor including one route along the causeway. This would have lead to visual impact and disturbance to users of the footpath/cycleway which follows the top of the embankment. The west facing rail link option has been selected as the preferred option. This provides for transport of fuel from both the port and the main line without the requirement for a conveyor.

11.3 As the design of the proposed new structures has evolved, specific consideration has been given to opportunities to minimise the visual impact. This includes the choice of colour of structures to limit both the close range and the distant visual effects of the proposed biomass power station. The construction of a vegetated bund along the western edge of the power station site in order to limit close range views from the PROW which runs along its length.

11.4 The operational biomass power station would have effects on landscape character of no more than a minor adverse level of significance. The visual effects on representative viewpoints in both the Lake District National Park and the Arnside and Silverdale AONB are assessed as of negligible significance.

11.5 Areas where there would be visual effects of some significance would be the Dowie Close and Hornbeam Crescent residential areas of Barrow-in-Furness.

11.6 There would be significant effects during construction and in the early years of operation on views from the Cistercian Way/Cumbria Coastal Way/Westfield Greenway footpath/cycleway where it passes adjacent to the power station site. Once proposed landscape planting in this area



26

was established the visual effects on this recreational route would be reduced to minor levels.

11.7 The power station would need to be lit for safety and operational reasons and a lighting strategy would be developed taking account of landscape, ecological and visual issues. The lighting strategy would also need to take into account the potential for any effects on navigation of shipping and any requirements for aviation safety. Detailed lighting plans have yet to be drawn up. However, key principles have been agreed such as using task specific lighting which is only turned on when actually needed, the use of luminaires which minimise light pollution in terms of light trespass, sky glow and glare.



27

12 Archaeology and Cultural Heritage 12.1 Examination of available maps and documents showed that the potential

for the presence of previously unidentified archaeological remains within the power station site is very low. Much of the land was formerly tidal sands and mudflats that were reclaimed following the construction of a railway embankment. The remaining areas within the power station site have been subject to extensive extraction of sand.

12.2 The land required for the port facilities and transport routes also has a very low potential for the presence of buried archaeological remains. Much of this land was reclaimed for the construction of the docks, whilst the remaining parts were previously used for the same type of transport infrastructure that is being proposed as part of the scheme (i.e. the re-establishment of earlier rail lines) or for fairly intensive industrial purposes. There would thus be no adverse effects on any archaeological remains.

12.3 In the wider landscape, designated and non-designated heritage assets have been identified and visited in order to understand their significance and the role that their setting plays in contributing to that significance. These are the Scheduled Monument of Bow Bridge, the Scheduled Monument and Grade I listed building of Piel Castle, the Grade II* listed building of Park House Farm, and a group of four Grade II listed buildings on Dungeon Lane, Roosecote.

12.4 No historic buildings would be demolished or physically altered by the proposed scheme, Furness Abbey and Bow Bridge are both located in a valley, and the protection of these assets would not be significantly changed. The power station would be visible from Piel Castle, although the castle is 4.9km from the proposed development. The key views of the castle would not be affected. The proposed new power station and stack would be clearly visible in views along Dungeon Lane. The effect would be minor.

12.5 A number of minor temporary adverse effects would occur during construction, and minor reversible adverse effects would occur during operation. No effects that would be considered to be significant have been identified.



28

13 Traffic and Transport 13.1 A detailed assessment of the existing transport network, including the

adjacent highway network, facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, and public transport provision has been carried out. This has been undertaken in liaison with Cumbria County Council. Assessments have included visual effects, severance, driver delay, pedestrian delay, pedestrian amenity and accidents and safety.

13.2 An assessment of sustainable modes of travel has been undertaken to establish the ability and likelihood of staff being able to travel to site by means other than the private car.

13.3 Traffic surveys have been undertaken to establish full details of existing traffic flows along the adjacent highway network. In addition to estimate future year traffic flows, traffic growth rates have been applied to account for the projected growth in traffic and the effect of other committed developments in the area. The observed traffic flows are as expected and do not show anything out of the ordinary. The observed flows are in keeping with the adjacent highway network and, as expected, larger traffic volumes were observed on the trunk road network.

13.4 Access to the site is currently either by road via the power station access road off Rampside Road, or via a footpath/cycleway along the western boundary of the power station. Use of this latter route as an alternative form of access by employees is already encouraged with a pedestrian access gate established at the west of the site. This pedestrian access is to be maintained and encouragement of employees to walk or cycle to the site would continue. Cycle parking, showers, changing areas and lockers are already provided within the office/admin building to support this.

13.5 There is an existing bus service on Rampside Road with bus routes between Barrow-in-Furness, Roa Island, Coast Road and Ulverston. The bus stops are currently located 650m south of the Roosecote Power Station access road. It is proposed to provide an additional bus stop within 400m of the access road to encourage employees to travel to the site by bus.

13.6 There is a railway station at Roose with services running between Carlisle, Barrow, Lancaster and Manchester Airport.

13.7 It is anticipated that a proportion of the construction workers would already be living in close proximity of the site or would be staying in temporary local accommodation. Therefore they could use the existing pedestrian and cycle routes to access the site. A Framework Construction Travel Plan has been prepared. This sets out measures to reduce the traffic impact during the construction phase including specific targets to minimise the use of single occupancy vehicles, to ensure operational vehicles use appropriate routes, to maximise the use of



29

public transport and to maximise the efficiency of operational vehicles. It is proposed that this travel plan would be reviewed and consulted with Cumbria County Council and other relevant parties before being finalised.

13.8 Construction materials would be sourced locally where reasonably practicable. Construction materials would generally be transported by road. There is potential for some materials and components to be transported by sea to the Port of Barrow or by rail. This would be explored further during the material and supplier selection process.

13.9 The site’s location provides the opportunity to deliver fuel for the proposed biomass plant (wood pellets, virgin wood chips and recycled/waste wood) by alternative methods to road transport. All fuel would be delivered to the power station by ship to the Port of Barrow and then by rail to the power station, or by train from the main rail network. Road transport would only be used for delivery of fuel in emergencies.

13.10 Trains would access the power station by utilising the existing reception sidings for the Port of Barrow and then passing along a new connection from those sidings directly to the power station.

13.11 The delivery of re-agents (e.g. sand and limestone) to be used in the process, and the removal of waste products, would be by road.

13.12 In terms of total traffic, the operation of the power station is unlikely to have any significant environmental effect.

13.13 A Framework Operational Travel Plan has been prepared for Roosecote Biomass Power Station. This would form the basis of a full Operational Travel Plan which would be further developed prior to commencement of the site operations. This travel plan identifies measures to maximise sustainable travel to the site. This would apply to employees and visitors and would aim to reduce private car use by encouraging sustainability, providing an appropriate level of car and cycle parking spaces, and be in accordance with sustainable and smarter choices policies.



30

14 Noise and Vibration 14.1 National policy requires that all reasonable steps should be taken to

avoid, mitigate and minimise adverse effects of noise on health and quality of life whilst also taking into account the guiding principles of sustainable development, which include social, economic, environmental and health considerations.

14.2 Noise and vibration during the construction and operation of the biomass power station, railway and fuel handling facilities have been predicted and assessed using British Standard methodologies.

14.3 Baseline surveys indicate that noise levels are low at all areas potentially affected by the development. However, there is a large variation in baseline noise levels that is likely to be due to variations in weather and atmospheric conditions.

14.4 During construction potential noise emissions include airborne noise from on-site construction operations and construction traffic on local roads, ground-borne vibration from percussive piling and underwater noise and vibration during berth construction and dredging. The CoCP sets out measures to minimise the adverse effects of noise during construction. This includes routing and programming of construction vehicle movement to minimise disturbance to local residents, HGV and site vehicles equipped with broadband, non-tonal reversing alarms, site hoardings to minimise noise propagation outside the site boundary and selection of piling techniques which minimise noise and vibration where practicable. All plant selected to be used during construction would comply with the noise limits quoted in the Noise Emissions in the Environment by Equipment for Use Outdoors Regulations 2001(SI 2001/1701).

14.5 Monitoring of noise levels would be carried out throughout the construction programme. A local community liaison strategy would be established. This would enable local residents and commercial buildings to be informed if any particularly noise or vibration generating operations are planned, and for any complaints to be recorded and addressed appropriately.

14.6 Construction noise and vibration effects would be negligible at residential areas due to the separation distance between houses and the site. There would be minor adverse effects of construction noise at neighbouring footpaths, cycleways, and fishing locations at Cavendish Dock.

14.7 The proposed biomass power station is being designed so that it meets the operational noise limits currently in place at the existing Roosecote power station. There is no history of complaints about noise from the site.



31

14.8 During operation, other potential noise emissions include noise associated with rail and ship unloading facilities, noise from road vehicles delivering process materials and transporting waste, and noise and vibration from fuel delivery trains.

14.9 The design of the process and infrastructure has incorporated measures to minimise the adverse effects of noise emissions in line with the Government’s Noise Policy Statement for England (NPSE). Measures include selection of quiet plant and processes, design of the building fabric to provide sound insulation, and specification of high performance silencers on stack outlet, exhausts, steam vents and other external noise sources.

14.10 The rail movements between the port and the power station, and from the rail network, would be restricted to a 13 hour period (8am – 9pm) Monday to Saturday. Sunday deliveries would only be required in the case of emergencies, or to clear any backlogs at the port if space was required for an imminent fuel delivery. Road deliveries and movements of HGVs would be between 6am and 11pm Monday to Friday and 7am to 5pm on Saturday.

14.11 An Operational Environmental Management Plan (OEMP) would be established, with measures to control noise during operation of the power station. This would include a noise monitoring strategy, which would be developed prior to commencement of operations. This would monitor noise at locations on the boundary of the power station site and the boundary of the fuel storage and handling site at the Port of Barrow. Centrica RPS Ltd would provide a telephone number and email address, as is already in place for the existing power station. This would be available so that any complaints that arise from the operation of the power station, berth or biomass fuel trains can be reported and addressed.



32

15 Waste Generation 15.1 Roosecote Power Station currently has a waste management procedure

for its operational wastes. Wastes are stored in a dedicated area of the site, with hazardous waste stored separately in appropriate containers. An audit in 2007 showed that Centrica RPS Ltd recycled over 69% of the operational waste generated at the site. This currently meets the regional target to recycle 35% of all commercial and industrial waste by 2020. Changing the power station from gas-powered to biomass would generate additional types of waste (i.e. bottom ash, fly ash and flue gas treatment (FGT) residue).

15.2 Waste management contractors in the area have been contacted to identify potential facilities (and their capacity) for managing the different types of waste. A key consideration is their ability to apply the highest level of the waste hierarchy principle where possible. There are a number of existing and proposed waste management facilities within the vicinity including a mechanical biological treatment (MBT) plant (currently under construction) and landfill. The region has a shortfall of landfill capacity, and as a result, some wastes from the county are transported to neighbouring Lancashire.

15.3 The collection and management of construction waste has been discussed with the EA, waste management contractors and the engineers/architects regarding the capacity of other waste management facilities in the vicinity.

15.4 During the development of the design a number of alternative options have been considered to maximise the reuse of existing facilities both within the existing power station and as part of the proposed development at the port and connecting rail links. Where it has been deemed appropriate, reuse of buildings and infrastructure has been incorporated in the proposals. This includes: Retention of the turbine building, the admin building and the

workshop/stores; Reuse of the existing water cooling infrastructure including retention

of the water treatment plant building, the raw and demineralised water tanks, the cooling water pump house and pipes; and

Retention of the access road to the sub-station and the emergency access to the Barrow Gas Terminals.

15.5 Waste minimisation opportunities have also been considered in the design of the process. In the FGT process the sodium bicarbonate and activated carbon are collected in the fabric filter and recycled to the base of the absorption tower to maximise the utilisation of these materials.

15.6 The proposals for Roosecote Biomass Power Station include the option to use recycled/waste wood as a fuel source. This wood is currently



33

typically disposed of in landfill, and by using it as a fuel source it would be beneficial in diverting this waste from landfill, aligning with current UK government policy. There is an associated benefit of reducing greenhouse gas emissions associated with the decomposition of wood in landfill.

15.7 Centrica RPS Ltd is part of a waste consortium established in Barrow-In-Furness with representatives from local industry, the local authorities and the EA. This consortium was originally established in 1991 and promotes a shared and proactive approach to waste management amongst the industry members and facilitates good working relationships with the regulators. This would continue throughout the operational lifetime of the proposed biomass power station and would aid a proactive approach to diverting waste from landfill.

15.8 In the first stages of construction, a number of structures would be removed from site. A pre-demolition audit would be undertaken to identify materials that can be reused within the development or offsite. This would include other construction wastes include dredgings from the construction of the new berth at Ramsden Dock, spoil and arisings, and general construction waste. A Site Construction Waste Management Plan has been drafted to define how these wastes would be managed.

15.9 During operation the main solid waste product of the plant is ash. This is removed from the process as bottom ash, boiler fly ash or FGT residue. The bottom ash would be screened with the finer material recycled to the bed material. The FGT solid residue would comprise of a small quantity of fly ash, excess sorbent, sulphide and chloride salts, excess carbon and volatile heavy metals including mercury. Due to the inclusion of recycled/waste wood in the fuel mix and the potential for the presence of heavy metal contaminants this would be disposed of as hazardous waste. It has been identified that it is feasible to use the fly ash waste and FGT residue as a raw material substitute in cement production. Wastes would also be generated from the screening the waste/recycled wood, and oversize materials.

15.10 An operational waste management strategy has been prepared to identify potential options for the disposal of the wastes, considering opportunities to divert all the major wastes from landfill. This would continue to be developed as the operation commences. Discussions are ongoing with waste management contractors and regulators in the vicinity to identify waste management options for the operational wastes, in particular the FGT residue.



34

16 Social and Economic Effects 16.1 Baseline conditions were established using a number of sources, notably

the 2001 Census, the National Online Manpower Information System (NOMIS) Labour Market Profiles, and the Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2010. Some information was obtained, and advice was sought, from Cumbria County Council, Barrow–in-Furness Borough Council and Cumbria Tourism. Information on visitor attractions and PROW was partly compiled from websites such as those of English Heritage, and from Ordnance Survey maps.

16.2 The key findings are that Barrow in Furness is a relatively isolated area which shows significant deprivation in many but not all parts, and on some but not all indicators.

16.3 The town and surrounding area have considerable natural and historic assets. These are however not among the most popular attractions in Cumbria, partly as a result of the area’s comparative isolation. The attractions are unquestionably important, particularly in terms of nature conservation, but have neither widespread popular appeal nor the capacity to accommodate large numbers of visitors.

16.4 The project is expected to provide a significant number of jobs in the construction phase. Many of these would require specialist skills which are more likely than not to be brought in from outside the area. The most likely benefits therefore are employment for local people to the extent that their skills can match requirements and the measures available to create the best match. There would also be benefits to local hotels and providers of other accommodation catering for workers who are brought in from outside the area.

16.5 Once the plant is in operation, it is hoped that the majority of the 50 jobs would be available to local people.

16.6 In terms of local amenity, steps would be taken to ensure that rights of way remain open in the construction and operational stage with local diversions where necessary. By the time the plant is in operation, close views of it from the footpath/cycleway passing along the western edge of the site would be mitigated by the construction of a bund with suitable planting.



35

17 Aviation and Telecommunications 17.1 The assessment has involved consultation with the Directorate of

Airspace Policy (part of the Civil Aviation Authority), the National Air Traffic Service, En Route Ltd, the Defence Infrastructure Organisation (part of the Ministry of Defence), Walney Island Airport and the Lakes Gliding Club. All these aviation stakeholders have confirmed that they have no objection to the proposed power station.

17.2 Bond Offshore Helicopters who operate the helicopters serving the neighbouring gas terminals have responded. They have no objection under the caveat that if operational experience indicates there is an unexpected problem, as evidenced by any safety reports, a review of the situation would need to be undertaken. The caveat is based on the assumption that any turbulence or exhaust efflux emitted from the biomass power station would not affect the helicopter approach paths to the helipad located at the neighbouring gas terminal.

17.3 The existing power station stack has aviation lighting. As requested by Walney Airport, the replacement stack would also be provided with aviation lighting.

17.4 Communication link operators in the area have been identified and consulted. No objection statements have been received from BT, Cable & Wireless and Hydrocarbon Resources (on behalf of Centrica Energy).

17.5 Link data supplied by Everything Everywhere Ltd (Orange) has been reviewed. None of the links identified cross the Roosecote site, hence it is concluded that there would be no impact.

17.6 The JRC has been consulted in relation to scanning telemetry links which are operated by utility companies. The JRC has responded to consultation stating that there is no objection in relation to the nearby links operated by Electricity North West, National Grid Gas Networks and United Utilities.

17.7 Guidance has been published by Ofcom in relation to potential effects on television reception. The guidance identifies that in cases of mild to moderate disruption it is sometimes possible to restore services by improving the quality of the existing aerial installation. Also alternative services can also be found via cable and satellite (either via subscription or Freesat). In the worst case there is also the possibility of constructing a digital ‘self-help’ transmitter.

17.8 Arqiva who manage re-broadcast television links have responded to consultation. They state that the proposed development is unlikely to affect any of their re-broadcast links and that there are no issues regarding microwave fixed links either.



36

18 Consultation and Next Steps 18.1 The IPC previously commented on the Applicant’s EIA Scoping Report;

the Scoping Opinion was issued by the IPC on 16th December 2011. The Applicant also consulted on the EIA Scoping Report (including a Public Exhibition in Barrow in November 2011) and responses to both the IPC’s and the Applicant’s consultations have been taken into account.

18.2 Following the initial public consultation based around the EIA Scoping Report, Centrica RPS Limited agreed its approached to the pre-application consultation strategy with Barrow Borough Council and Cumbria County Council and this was set out in the Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC). This set out how the community consultation process would work. Following consultation and agreement with the Councils, the SoCC was published in a local paper (North West Evening Mail – 17 February 2012) so that the community was made aware of the proposed programme.

18.3 For development such as this that falls within the scope of the EIA Directive, the Planning Act 2008 requires the applicant to consult on the Preliminary Environmental Information (PEI). The pre-application consultation, including the PEI, took place during February and March 2012.

18.4 Once the application for consent is accepted by the Planning Inspectorate, further consultation will be undertaken by the Inspectorate and hearings may also be held to hear evidence on certain matters.

18.5 The process will be taken forward by the Planning Inspectorate. Following their Examination of the application, they will prepare a report and recommendations for the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change who will then make the final decision. The decision will consider whether the application is in accordance with the relevant National Policy Statements.

18.6 Members of the public and other stakeholders can obtain further information on Centrica RPS Ltd and the project proposals by: • Logging onto the dedicated project website at

www.centrica.com/roosecotebiomass • Emailing: [email protected] • Writing to: Centrica RPS Ltd, Maidenhead Road, Windsor,

Berkshire, SL4 5GD



37

Figures Figure 1 Proposed Development Consent Order Boundary Figure 2 Roosecote Biomass Power Station – Proposed Layout Figure 3 Port facilities – Proposed layout Figure 4 Roosecote Biomass Power Station - Indicative Colour Scheme

Drawn: GP Checked: KJ Job Ref: 7339

Date: May12 Datum: OSGB36

Client:

Project:

O:\7

339b

Roo

seco

te B

iom

ass

EIA

\Tec

h\D

raw

ings

\733

9-00

60-1

1.dw

g

Centrica RPS Limited

Roosecote Biomass Power Station

Figure no: 1

Title:

NScale @A3 1:10,0000 100 200 300 400 500

m

20 Milton Park Abingdon Oxon OX14 4SHT 01235 821888 E [email protected] W www.rpsgroup.com

Status: Final

Data Source: RPS 2012

© Crown copyright, All rights reserved. 2012 License number 0100031673,10001998, 100048492. Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2012

Proposed Development ConsentOrder Boundary

LEGEND:Proposed Development ConsentOrder Boundary

Legend

Proposed New Structures

Elevation from South: Not to scale

Plan View Scale 1:2000

70.00m

35.00m31.50m

25.00m

00.00m

10.00m

Administration/workshop/transformer building

StorageSilos

Rail loadingarea building

Proposed Berth with70m tall cranes

Deliveryship

Screeningbuilding



Client:

Project:

C:\D

OC

UM

E~1

\pak

eman

g\LO

CA

LS~1

\Tem

p\A

cPub

lish_

1724

\733

9-00

69-0

6.dw

g



Figure no: 3

Title: Proposed Development at Port of BarrowPlan and Elevation

N

Scale @A3 1:2,0000 20 40 60 80 100

m


Status: Final



Scale: as shown

43.00m



Client:

Project:

O:\7

339b

Roo

seco

te B

iom

ass

EIA

\Tec

h\D

raw

ings

\733

9-01

46-0

1.dw

g



Figure no: 4

Title: Proposed Power StationIndicative Colour Scheme

N


Status: Final



3D View: Not to recognised scale

centrica rps limited roosecote biomass power station, … · document reference 6.4 centrica rps...

Documents