Early powerplant proposals see the light
January 7, 2010 by Ally Outline plans by Forth Energy for a biomass powerplant on Leith Docks have been released on a new dedicated website.
Forth Energy is a joint venture set-up by two of Scotlands largest companies, Forth Ports and Scottish and Southern Energy. It aims to develop renewable energy powerplants on the land holdings of Forth Ports in Leith, Rosyth, Dundee and Grangemouth.
The initial scoping study for Leith (pdf download) runs to 82 pages, so we've not had a chance to digest it in detail ourselves yet. However, we'd encourage avid Leith regeneration watchers to have a look at it, and lend us your thoughts on this dedicated discussion thread of the Greener Leith Social.
The formal public consultation process on the proposal is set to start "in the coming months", so we'd love to hear as broad a cross section of views from local residents on the plans now. Below, we give some initial thoughts and pose some questions.
Firstly, the most obvious thing that we've noticed is that the proposals do not seem to follow the previously agreed Masterplan or Outline Planning permission for the docks at all. The site where the powerplant is set to go, is, as we understand it, earmarked by Forth Ports for residential use. The area outlined in red in the map below is where the powerplant is set to go:
Yet this is what Forth Ports previously applied to build:
So, it would seem that these new proposals represent a serious shift away from the original plans. Obviously the recession, and the collapse in the residential property market has led Forth Ports to seek new ways to maximise the value of their land holdings. However, this change of heart has serious implications for the future of the whole docks area.
What does Forth Ports plan to do with the whole area of land between the Imperial Dock and the coastline?
What are the implications for the planned coastal promenade path, if that area remains as an active port serving an industrial purpose?
We note that the more detailed planning proposals for The Harbour, Leith Docks included two further, much smaller, sites designated as 'Energy Centres' (These are the red bits in the map below.) We assume that those plans are also therefore superceeded by this latest Forth Energy plan.
There are also other aspects of the plan that have already raised eyebrows on The Greener Leith Social. The proposed plant itself is big. It will be 65m high with 100m chimney stack. This means you'll be able to see if from, well, everywhere. Helpfully, Forth Energy have produced a map that shows you where people will be able to see it from. The green bits of the map are places where you'll be able to see the whole plant, and the red bits are places where you'll be lucky enough to only see the chimney.
Also, we note concerns over how Biomass will be transported to the site. Forth Energy estimates that 70% of the fuel for the plant will be imported by sea. By one local residents calculations, that still leaves about 400,000 tonnes of biomass that must arrive by another means. Some could come by rail to the plant - but nevertheless it would seem likely that a fairly sizable proportion of this would come by road. How many lorry journeys would it take to transport 400,000 tonnes of woodchip and other biomass?
There are obvious positives that we should not discount too. The power plant will help to generate a significant amount of renewable energy and it has the potential to support a district heating system too. It will provide much needed local jobs in sectors other than tourism and retail, helping to support a diverse local economy.
We'd like to hear your thoughts, either in the comments to this post below, or on the Greener Leith Social, on the matter. Do the negatives outweigh the positives? Should the development be scaled down? Where does it leave the plans for the rest of the docks? Do you welcome the potential for a massive investment in green energy and sustainable jobs in our neighbourhood?
Action Alerts, Biomass, Energy & Climate Change, Planning and Regeneration
Reader Comments (7)
I just hope we can have a calm discussion about the merits rather than the slanging match typified by Beauly-Denny.
As economics will be key, I'm concerned over where all this supposedly sustainable supply will come from. The Leith scoping report (section 3.3.1) says it'll use "1.3 million tonnes per year of biomass fuel (dependent upon calorific value)". It refers to virgin timber and purpose grown energy crops - virgin timber has climate concerns (losing more carbon sinks) and 'purposely grown' raises questions over land use (food or fuel, indigenous lands etc). I don't have faith in the term 'sustainable', I'm afraid, as it's been so abused in the past.
I'm disappointed at the phrase 'capable of exporting heat' - they may be 'capable' but will they actually export heat to nearby users? This makes a huge difference - we have to stop wasting energy! Section 3.3.1 in each report says "The plant will generate ...and also, if feasible, renewable heat to local users". I think a district heating system must be part of the plan, at Leith and the other 3 sites in Scotland. Scotland has ambitious targets for reducing CO2 emissions - how will we achieve this without some bold political leadership?
What about the soon to be redundant Powderhall transfer station which has a rail connection and is in the right location to for a CHP plant serving the local area.
Knee-jerk planning is just not good enough.
I don't think it's reasonable to say we should be cutting energy waste INSTEAD of building biomass CHP schemes such as this: we need both, and quickly, if we're to cut our carbon emissions by the 42% by 2050.
So in principle we should support this scheme, albeit with the caveat that the district heating schemes must be an intrinsic part of it, not an afterthought. We should also make some comment about transport of the biomass: aiming for 100% to come by ship and train, for example.
If a group like ours were to oppose proposals like this simply because of visual amenity we'd lose all credibility - and rightly so. I can see the Leith flour mill from my house - does that mean it should be demolished?
'Feasible' could be economically or technically - not sure how one installs district heating retrospectively but it's not going to be cheap. If the original Forth Ports plan was scrapped due to costs, doesn't that suggest that this one will be looking to keep costs at a minimum? So if it gets approval with the "if feasible" clause in tact, then I'll eat my hat if CHP is included!
I know no-one gets as agitated about net energy as I do but the whole scheme should be considered in light of how much energy we get out compared to the energy in (e.g. construction, transportation & production of biomass etc) - CHP means you get more useable energy out for the same input so must be campaigned for whether the biomass is 'sustainably sourced' or not (which is another issue about which I'm also concerned...)
There are good reasons to think that the climate impacts of large import-reliant power stations could be very negative. Firstly, there are very high upfront/smokestack CO2 emissions from biomass. If trees are cut down for bioenergy in Europe or North America, it will take around 30 years for new trees to re-absorb the carbon emitted in the first place, yet we need serious emission reductions now, not in decades to come. At the same time, Europe's new interest in biomass imports is already leading to plans in Indonesia, Brazil and elsewhere for new monoculture plantations - including in countries where rainforests and other ecosystems have already been destroyed and communities been evicted for tree plantations for other purposes. Forth Energy, like virtually all companies, say that they will only use 'sustainable biomass' (they haven't been more specific so far), but there's no auditing and the question of how much demand/how many imports are sustainable needs to be asked.