Leith MSP Malcolm Chisholm praises city coalition deal

Stewart Lochhead from Three Men In A Blog recently posted this audio interview with Leith MSP Malcolm Chisholm to Soundcloud. In the interview they discuss the new Labour/SNP coalition deal at the City Chambers.

Whilst the chairs are still being shuffled on the Royal Mile, it looks as though Leith councillors are set to take up some key roles in the new administration.

Leith Walk councillor Deidre Brock is lined up to become Deputy Provost, after serving as Convenor of Culture and Leisure in the previous administration. In the same ward Labour Councillor Angela Blacklock is set to become vice-convenor of the Regulatory Committee according to the Edinburgh Labour website, whilst her party colleague in the Leith Ward, Gordon Munro, is lined up for the vice-convernorship of the Economic Development Committee.  

You can read the Labour and SNP coalition agreement in full below: 

A New Contract With the Capital

Leithers will be interested to note that one of the more specific pledges in the document is a commitment to oppose commercial biomass plants. This will give some comfort to No Leith Biomass campaigners, who remain concerned that Forth Energy will return with a new proposal for another large biomass power plant on the docks. 

Local MSP backs 20mph residential speed limit and better bike lanes

Cycle safety has been a high profile political issue in Edinburgh recently. Lothians Green MSP Alison Johnstone used a rare opportunity to hold a debate in the parliament this week to discuss the issue.

Local MSP Malcolm Chisholm took part in the debate (he speaks at about 31 mins into the debate in the video above), and we were delighted that he mentioned Greener Leith and quoted our We Love Leith active travel work extensively in his speech.

Hundreds of Leithers we worked with indicated that they would like to see more dedicated cycle facilities and lower speed limits in the neighbourhood. It's great to see our MSP take these views to Holyrood. 

You can read the full text of what he said in the debate below:

"I welcome the Scottish Government’s reaffirmation of its commitment to ensure that 10 per cent of journeys will be made by bike by 2020, since that is clearly highly desirable in terms of health and climate change. However, being realistic, I do not think it looks like we will achieve the target given that—late increases in the budget process notwithstanding—the active travel budget is still less than 1 per cent of the total transport budget. 

"It seems to me and, I am sure, to others in the chamber that safety is the key to reaching the target. Alison Johnstone highlighted the sad and tragic fact that 16 cyclists have died on Lothian roads this century.

"Cyclists desperately need more space on roads and more 20mph limits in residential areas. In that regard, I emphasise the importance of the Labour amendment and I hope that the Scottish Government will consider the guidance that appears to discourage some local authorities from introducing such zones. 

"Of course, cycle paths are important—there are many good ones in my constituency, which will encourage me to return to cycling in due course—but action on cycle training is also required. Alison Johnstone and I attended a recent cycle training event at Leith primary school, but we would agree that action on cycle training of that sort is to no avail if the other safety measures are not taken.

"Local community-led campaigns, such as the we love Leith campaign by the Greener Leith organisation, are important. I pay tribute to the Scottish Government for providing much of that campaign’s funding through the climate challenge fund. It involved community consultation, behaviour change work and efforts to tackle the barriers to active travel that were identified by local residents.

"The first consultation, involving 450 residents, put the behaviour of other road users at the top of the list of reasons for people disliking cycling, along with danger and vulnerability in general. That is perhaps not surprising because, as I was alarmed to read in a newspaper report a couple of weeks ago, Leith Walk has been flagged up as one of the 10 most dangerous streets in the United Kingdom for cyclists. 

"When residents were asked what would encourage them to cycle more, 49 per cent said that infrastructure improvements would be the main thing that would get them back on their bike. A second consultation flagged up dedicated cycle lanes on main arterial routes as the top cycling priority.

"Greener Leith has also highlighted the need to reduce traffic growth in general in order to encourage cycling, as well as for many other purposes. In particular, it flagged up the social cohesion of neighbourhoods, the sense of ownership of public space and mental and physical health. Therefore, I am alarmed that traffic trends tend to be going in the opposition direction. I have lodged some parliamentary questions about that this week.

"Edinburgh has been referred to quite a bit. We must acknowledge that a lot of good work has been done, but I think that the 5 per cent of the budget for active travel schemes next year is not matched by this year’s budget for them, which is 1 per cent of revenue spend.

"Edinburgh Labour has emphasised the separation of bikes and road traffic, the safe storage of bikes, possible cycle hire schemes, school cycling training and 20mph speed limits. I re-emphasise that last point. It seems to me that the widespread use of 20mph speed limits in residential areas would benefit cyclists and pedestrians alike."

You can view the text of the motion here.  

 A summary report of the research that Malcolm Chisholm referred to in his speech can be downloaded by clicking here. 

Malcolm Chisholm calls on Holyrood to toughen big biomass policies

Malcolm Chisholm with No Leith Biomass campaigners at the Foot of the Walk

Today in the Scottish Parliament there was a debate on the "Low Carbon Economy." Local MSP Malcolm Chisholm spoke at length in the debate about his reservations over the Forth Energy proposals for a giant power plant on Leith docks. 

We should add that we're delighted that he has mentioned our work on this issue in the Holyrood debating chamber too and that he has raised, once again, our calls for a moratorium on large scale biomass plants. There are a great many people, working both in and out of the parliament to campaign against the Forth Energy proposals on Leith Docks, and the other power plants they want to build elsewhere in Scotland.

If you would like to show your support for the campaign, there is a public protest this Saturday.  

In the meantime, we reproduce everything Mr Chisholm said today to save you searching for it on the Holyrood website: 

Malcolm Chisholm (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (Lab): I want to concentrate on energy from a constituency point of view. There are wider agendas in achieving a low-carbon Scotland, including a step change in housing insulation and a serious drive towards a green transport strategy.

I want to ask what should be included in a definition of green energy, and to ask that question in the context of Forth Ports Ltd’s plans for Leith docks. At a recent meeting with the chief executive of Forth Ports, I was told that the company—which has recently been taken over by Arcus—was abandoning its housing plans for the Leith docks area in order to develop a renewable energy hub based on offshore wind and large-scale biomass, the latter as Forth Energy in partnership with Scottish and Southern Energy.

For Forth Ports, these two go hand in hand, but I want to challenge the green credentials of large-scale biomass while welcoming the prospect of Leith docks as a site for the manufacture and assembly of wind turbines, as envisaged in Scottish Enterprise’s national renewables infrastructure plan. There have been massive campaigns in Leith over the past year or more against the proposed large-scale biomass plant at Leith docks. This action has been spearheaded by the formidable and admirable no Leith biomass plant group.

I have submitted detailed objections that cover the many specifically local implications as well as the wider climate change consequences. Given the subject of our debate, I want to concentrate on the latter, although visual, traffic and local environmental concerns are all covered in my submission, which is on my website and the Scottish Government’s website—I thank the Scottish Government for that.

Greener Leith is a key organisation that opposes the proposal, and its website refers to many important reports that question the green credentials of large-scale biomass. For example, it refers to a new report that has been produced by a coalition of European non-governmental organisations, which raises a host of environmental concerns about the growth and use of biomass for electricity generation, and includes a startling graph that shows that a biomass plant that uses a typical European-managed forest would result in increased carbon emissions for the first two and a half centuries. Perhaps that it is not too surprising if we consider that burning wood emits more carbon in the short run than burning coal. The scenario could be even worse if unsustainable plantations are used, and stopping that would be impossible in the future, despite the current guarantees from Forth Energy.

On its website, Greener Leith highlights a key quote from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, which has said:

“In particular, we are concerned that the methodology deployed to calculate the lifetime green house gas savings”

of the scheme—that is, the Leith biomass plant proposal—

“includes an assumption of zero emissions from land within the growing cycle of the fuels ... This is likely to be incorrect and therefore leads to a potentially significant underestimate of green house gas emissions from the fuel. The calculation of green house gas savings from transport may also be underestimated.”

Forth Energy has consistently promoted the idea that burning wood fuel and replenishing crops after harvest limits the levels of carbon that are released into the atmosphere, but an increasing number of environmental organisations have stated that that position is too simplistic. The long-term effects of biomass combustion on the atmosphere and on climate change depend on the type of feedstock that is used, how sustainable the source is, and the alternative energy sources that are displaced by investment in such plants.

It is remarkable that Forth Energy continues to categorise biomass energy as carbon neutral, as a large body of evidence has been produced by groups such as Friends of the Earth to demonstrate that biomass is not anywhere near as efficient as alternative clean energy sources, which represent far more effective use of Government funding and deliver instant carbon reduction. Biomass would not only displace traditional fossil fuel sources; it would affect the ability of wind and tidal power to distribute clean carbon-neutral energy throughout Scotland.

The moving planet march that will take place in Edinburgh this weekend will aim to highlight the fact that moving from fossil fuels to clean energy sources is essential in tackling climate change and poverty. As outlined in Friends of the Earth’s recent briefing on the event, that means that policy must be directed to ensuring investment in appropriate sustainable technologies.

Kevin Stewart: What are Mr Chisholm’s feelings about small-scale biomass, such as the biomass boiler that is being used to deal with the energy needs of the new Marischal college project in Aberdeen, which has received European funding?

Malcolm Chisholm: I was going to come on to that issue, although I may not have time to cover everything that I wanted to cover. Small-scale biomass—particularly for combined heat and power—is exactly what we need, rather than large-scale biomass. I was going to refer to an earlier Friends of the Earth publication entitled “Energy from Biomass: Straw Man or Future Fuel?” which made that particular point. It supported small-scale biomass plants and highlighted the issue of transportation of biomass material. That is, of course, a major concern for the proposed Leith plant, because the wood would be brought in from thousands of miles away. We must take all such factors into account. I am seriously concerned that the plant that has been proposed for Leith docks is not small scale, that the proposal would involve intensive harvesting overseas and long-distance transport, and that no concrete plans have been provided to date on how the heat by-product of combustion would be effectively distributed to the wider city.

I realise that there is a live application, but I do not see why the Government should not have a policy against large-scale biomass. It has a policy against nuclear power stations that does not rule out submission of individual applications. The Government should therefore have a policy against large-scale biomass. If it will not go that far, it should at least have a moratorium, pending further research on its climate change implications.

Forth Energy kick Leith Biomass plant into the long grass

An artists impression of the biomass plant, made using Google Earth. This view looks down Constitution Street from a tall building.If you take a look at the Forth Energy website, there's nothing on it to indicate that their plans for a giant power plant that they propose to build on Leith Docks have been put on the back burner.

Indeed, the firm has been busy of late, churning out glossy PR brochures for the other biomass plants they propose in other parts of Scotland called things like, ahem, "Greener Grangemouth." The brochures contain the same virtually meaningless pledges on fuel sources and questionable carbon savings claims that their planning applications do.

The only change now is that they've got some titles that imply in some way that they're part of an environmental organisation. Although imitation is the greatest form of flattery, as you can imagine, we've had some of Scotland's finest legal minds poised to sue for trademark infringement the moment Forth Energy publish their equivalent, "Greener Leith," newsletter for weeks. But for some reason it hasn't happened.

Recently, local MSP Malcolm Chisholm shed some light on the apparent delay at a Leith Links Community Council meeting. He said he'd managed to meet with Charles Hammond, head of Forth Ports and he confirmed that the Leith Biomass plant will be the last to be pursued by Forth Energy (Forth energy is part owned by Forth Ports).

Not only that, Mr Hammond apparently told Malcolm Chisholm that the council will not now consider the planning application in December as we'd previously be led to believe, but "later." Given that every single candidate in the recent City Centre by-election said that they'd vote against the Leith biomass plant proposals, it's probably an astute move on their part to push consideration of the proposal beyond May - as they may be hoping to avoid the proposal becoming a political issue in the next Scottish Local elections.

Judging by the way the politics is playing out, this would seem unlikely. We've already seen that the Leith Biomass plant remains a critical local issue, in large part due to the sterling efforts of the No Leith Biomass campaigners. But it's not just a local issue - the questionable environmental wisdom of burning lots of imported timber just to generate electricity is rising up both the policy and political agendas throughout the UK. 

Recently, the independent statutory body set up by the UK government to advise Westminster and the devolved administrations on climate change issues, The Committee on Climate Change, released a report that was pretty skeptical of using biomass for power generation in the way that Forth Energy proposes to do.

You can read their whole report below:

CCC_The Renewable Energy Review

This report, suggests that biomass should not be used for power generation without being fitted with Carbon Capture and Storage technology (which currently doesn't exist) and is probably not a good use of scarce global biomass resources.

This report has not gone unnoticed in Scotland. SNP MSP for the Falkirk area, Angus MacDonald ("Greener Grangemouth" is in his constituency) has submitted this motion in the Holyrood parliament:

Motion S4M-00748 - Angus MacDonald ( Falkirk East ) ( Scottish National Party ) : UK Committee on Climate Change Comments on Biomass

That the Parliament notes the recent publication by the influential UK Committee on Climate Change (CCC) of its review of the potential for renewable energy development; in particular notes its comments on biomass, including its preliminary conclusion that without CCS (carbon capture and storage), biomass would probably be of more value when used outside the power sector"; considers that this conclusion runs counter to Forth Energy's large-scale biomass proposals in Grangemouth, Rosyth, Dundee and Leith; welcomes the Scottish Government's preference for biomass to be deployed in heat-only or combined heat and power schemes, generally prioritised in off gas-grid areas, at a scale appropriate to make best use of both the available heat and local supply; looks forward to the CCC's more detailed assessment of biomass later in 2011, and calls on Scottish ministers to reject Forth Energy's proposals that require ministerial consent.

That motion is interesting as it explicitly calls on the Scottish Government proposals to deny Forth Energy consent for all four of their proposed large biomass plants.

Another recent motion at Holyrood may also be of interest too. Several Edinburgh MSP's have backed this one, which gives support to a planned protest march against the Biomass proposals later this month.

Motion S4M-00616 - Jim Eadie ( Edinburgh Southern ) ( Scottish National Party ) : Moving Planet March

That the Parliament supports the Moving Planet march and rally on Saturday 24 September 2011, called by the international non-governmental organisation, 350.org, to mark the Global Day of Climate Action; notes that 350.org calls for a sustainable energy future for the world at 350 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which is what many scientists consider to be the safe upper limit; notes that the event will coincide with the world car-free day and that it will aim to put pressure on global leaders to commit to reducing CO2 levels in advance of the UN Climate Summit in Durban, South Africa, in November 2011, and welcomes the parallel aim of this event, to draw attention to opposition to the proposed Forth Energy biomass plant at Leith Docks.

Despite all this Forth Energy insist the Leith Biomass plan is still on the table. If you wish to support the campaigners who are trying to put the Leith Biomass plan in the long grass permanently, and you were wondering what else you can do now that you've put in your objection to the Leith Biomass plant, you can do these two things:

1. Use www.writetothem.com and urge your all your local MSP's - especially your list MSP's - to support both of these motions. Malcolm Chisholm, constituency MSP for Leith, has signed both, but there are still some list MSPs who have not.

2. Take part in the planned protest event on the 24th of September. You can find out more about the event here.

Back our Energyshare bid to boost community power

 A unique partnership between two Edinburgh community groups has been established to develop a community owned wind turbine on the coast between Portobello and Leith.

PEDAL – Portobello Transition Town and Greener Leith have joined forces to conduct detailed feasibility work on a site within the Seafield Waste Water Treatment Works. Early surveys suggest a wind turbine on this site has the potential to generate enough renewable energy to supply the annual electricity needs of 300 - 1300 households, depending on the size of turbine installed.

The generator would be the first community-owned urban wind turbine in Scotland.

The project would see substantial sums raised for local community projects over the lifetime of the project. The two groups have now launched a campaign to raise funding to develop the project, and are urging local residents to help win funding by supporting a bid to the Energyshare Fund.

The projects with the most supporters on the Energyshare website have the greatest chance of winning funding. Therefore, both community groups are urging Edinburgh residents to register their support on the Energyshare website before the 30th June at:

http://tiny.cc/porty-leith-wind

Jane Lewis, Chair of PEDAL – Portobello Transition Town said:

“"We have been working hard to find suitable renewable energy projects that will deliver carbon savings, a long-term source of funding for local community projects, and also provide a visible demonstration of the renewable resources to be found locally. We think this proposal has real promise, and we’re asking for community support to take it forward.”

Charlotte Encombe, Chair of Greener Leith said:

"This project could create a community fund to help thousands of local people for many years into the future. Whilst there's still a lot of work to do before the project gets the final green light, we hope that the proposed wind turbine will become a landmark and a source of local pride, as well as power.”

Kenny MacAskill, Member of the Scottish Parliament for Edinburgh Eastern said,

“I fully support this excellent proposal from Pedal and Greener Leith which chimes well with our national moves to develop Scotland as the Green Energy Powerhouse of Europe, and to encourage community ownership of renewables. I’m pleased to hear that Pedal will be seeking local residents’ views.”
 

 Everybody is quite clear that the project will only be able to go ahead with the backing of local residents, and many details of the project remain to be worked out, including the size of the turbine, the way any financial surplus is distributed from the project, and what types of activities the money would be used to fund.

 

The images above illustrate what the turbine would look like if the largest feasible turbine was supported by the public. You can see a larger version of the images by clicking on them.

We should add that these images are just to give you an idea of what the turbine would look like and the final appearance could vary depending upon the outcome of the public consultation process that we intend to announce shortly.

You can find out more details about the project in this Frequently Asked Questions document that we have prepared:

Portobello & Leith Community Wind Energy Project FAQ Final

Lastly, you may think that building a community owned wind turbine is an off the wall idea that could never happen. Well you may be surprised to learn that this week, the first ever community owned wind turbine project on mainland Scotland is about to start generating power, after five years work by local volunteers in the Aberdeenshire area of Udny.

Alastair Tibbitt from Greener Leith managed to catch up with two of those volunteers, Brian MacDougall and Mike MacDonald, after they'd been speaking at a meeting on energy policy called by Friends of the Earth Scotland. They shared their thoughts on their five year journey from idea to turbine construction in an audio interview that you can listen to below: 

Would you like to get involved in helping to develop a community wind turbine project at Seafield? The first thing you need to do is back our bid on the Energyshare website here: http://tiny.cc/porty-leith-wind

Last day for Leith Power Plant objections.

Find more photos like this on The Greener Leith Social

Today is the last day for members of the public to object to the Forth Energy Leith Biomass plant. If you've not objected yet you can do it online, really easily on the Friends of the Earth Website by clicking here.

The campaign has generated a resounding no from Leithers, and civic society. Lothians SNP MSP, Shirely-Anne Somerville asked the Scottish Government how many objections they'd received this week. The answer?

898 objections logged against the proposal, with approximately 400 still to be recorded. Only 2 representations have been received that are in favour of the plant.

In addition we know of at least 5 community councils that have objected to the plan. Numerous local residents groups, and politicians of many persuations. More objections have been published online this week, and as we still cannot depend on the Scottish Government to publish all objections in a transparent way, we link to as many of them as we can find here:

• Mark Lazarowicz MP (Labour)
• Sheila Gilmore MP (Labour)
• Malcolm Chisholm MSP (Labour)
• Shirley-Anne Somerville MSP (SNP)
• Leith SNP 
• Cllr Maggie Chapman (Green)
• Port of Leith Housing Association
• Greener Leith
• The Cockburn Association
• Friends of the Water of Leith Basin
• Leith Links Residents Association
• Leith Links Community Council

With the period of public consultation drawing to a close, attention will now focus on the City of Edinburgh Council response. Although it is the Scottish Governent who will utlimately decide on whether the plant will get consent, if the council objects, they will force the application to go to a public enquiry.

So far we know the SNP group on the council is against it. We know that the Green group is against it. And we know that Labour are likely against it. There are 58 city councillors, and the SNP, Labour and Greens together make 30 councillors, so if a vote were to go to party political lines we could, in theory see the proposals rejected.

Among the LibDems only Cllr Louise Lang, and Cllr Marjorie Thomas  have made public statements of opposition to the plant. A number of other LibDems have also expressed reservations but not outright opposition. We have heard no Conservative councillors express an opinion on the matter.

Should you wish to continue to support the campaign we recommend that you consider writing or emailing Liberal Democrat or Conservative councillors in key positions. You may also want to write to councillors on the Planning Committee.

The Guardian Edinburgh website has also been publishing some passionate objections to the plant from local residents:

• Tim Threllfall
• Ewan McIntosh

If you would like us to link to, or publish your objection, please do get in touch.

Leith Biomass protest at Holyrood

Photo credit: @Yonmei via TwitpicLeithers took the Leith Biomass protest to Holyrood today. The aim of the protest was to encourage more MSPs to question the claims made by Forth Energy for their proposals to build a giant power plant on Leith Docks. A number of MSPs came out to speak to the protesters including: Robin Harper, Malcolm Chisholm, Shirley-Anne Somerville, Cathy Peattie, Roseanna Cunningham and George Foukes. Shiela Gilmore, Labour MP for Edinburgh East was also there in support.

Guardian Beatblogger, Michael MacLeod was there. He interveiwed local councillors Gordon Munro and Rob Munn.

Both them said that they had not heard of a single person who supports the Forth Energy proposals. You can listen to the Guardian Edinburgh interview on Audioboo. 

In the interview, Cllr Munn revealed that Lib Dem Councillor, for the Leith Walk ward, Louise Lang, has now come out publicly in opposition to the plan, and both councillors conclude that the opposition to the plant in Edinburgh is now truly cross party, increasing the chances that the city will object to the plan, forcing a public enquiry.

In Holyrood, Shirley Anne Somerville asked the environment minister a question in parliament on the current government policy, reporting the response via Twitter:

Asked qu re #leithbiomass in parliament. Minister confirmed govt wish for small scale off grid chp biomass. Complete opposite of Leith. #fbless than a minute ago via TweetDeckS-A Somerville
S_A_Somerville

Last week, both Broughton and New Town and Leith Central Community Councils voted to oppose the plans too.

Meanwhile, Dr Ulrich Loening, an academic and timber firm owner, who was once described as one of "ten Scots who canl save the world," for his environmental work has written a guest post on the Friends of the Earth Scotland blog explaining why large biomass plants, like the proposed Leith power plant are unlikely to save much carbon any time soon.

Update on February 25, 2011 by Ally

Today, the Guardian published a YouTube video featuring interviews with many of the people at the Holyrood protest:

This weeks Leith biomass roundup

Half way through the window for public consultation on the Forth Energy biomass plant, there are so many things to report that this post has become a bit of a round-up.

As we posted previously, one Edinburgh resident who opposes the plant put together a Google Earth mock-up of the plant, based on the dimensions, and the graphics provided by Forth Energy in their planning application. The idea being that anyone with access to the program could see how the plant would look from anywhere - even space. A few locals then used this to come up with their own user generated images.

This week, the Google Earth file has been used in a new way. A supporter of the No Leith Biomass campaign has produced this 'fly-through' using Google Earth, and added some captions to provide people with more information on the plant. You can view it below:

Proposed Biomass Power Station Leith, Edinburgh February 2011 from EM 9o7 on Vimeo.

Meanwhile, I followed up one of the points made by at last weeks Leith Biomass public meeting, over how the plant would be connected to the grid - and the possible travel disruption this could cause. You can read the response from local business groups and Forth Energy on the North Edinburgh STV website.

A day later, a three person team of senior staff from Forth Energy were said to be sent home 'with their tails between their legs' from a meeting at the Mal Maison hotel after strong criticism from members of the Friends of the Water of Leith Basin group.

The No Leith Biomass campaign, who say that 'hundreds' of objections have already been sent to the Scottish Government, has also produced a campaign Twibbon. Meanwhile more and more people continue to use the #leithbiomass hashtag on Twitter to share campaign updates and information and nearly 800 people have signed the online petition.

In the last couple of weeks, the political mood has continued to shift against the proposals too. The Edinburgh Green Party has voted to oppose the plant, The Leith branch of the SNP has voted to oppose the plant and Shiela Gilmore MP had this to say on her blog, after joining her Labour colleague Malcolm Chisholm MSP at the No Leith Biomass demonstration last week: 

‘The plans just don’t add up; at a meeting last week, residents were shushed when organisers tried to claim the greater efficiencies would come thanks to the municipal heating system. This municipal heating system is at present an idea that will only be developed when consent is granted, so, efficiency of this green ‘renewable’ plant will be around 30-40%, similar to existing electricity plants.

‘Further still, in 40 years time, when Forth Ports have finished regenerating the area, the plant area will be again be redeveloped, without a plant to supply a municipal heating system!'

‘We need to reduce carbon emissions and use the resources that we have in Scotland. Sourcing the wood chippings from around the world is not green, nor is ferrying waste and ash through the already clogged roads in Edinburgh East.'

‘I’m with the campaigners on this one; the plant is too big, in the wrong place, and it is not green.’

The No Leith Biomass group plan to take the campaign to Holyrood next. There will be a demonstration on Thursday the 24th of February. If you want to go, meet at 12 as the demo is planned to run for an hour 12.30 - 1.30pm.

You can find out more about the No Leith Biomass campaign at www.noleithbiomass.org.uk