Letter: The burning issue
LETTER: I refer to the public inquiry relating to the proposed biomass incinerator at Bishop's Castle.
Over the first three days of the inquiry we have heard opinions from witnesses called by the applicants to support their case.
When asked to give a comparison regarding the amount of particulate emissions to be expected from the plant, for example, one witness states it would be equivalent to the output of 10,000 diesel engines per annum.
It doesn't take much sense to recognise that these eng-ines would be on wheels, thus dispersing their emissions, and not on a fixed site.
Add to this the entrapment of these emissions in a valley subject to frequent atmospheric inversions and you might understand the concerns of residents.
Another witness states that there is plenty of woodland available locally to provide fuel, which would include woodland brash – the detritus left after trees have been felled.
A vast number of environmental scientists deplore this practice due to the huge environmental damage caused. Numerous witnesses have said that conditions "could" be applied before gaining planning con sent, but not that they will be.
However, if the developers decide in due course that these conditions are too onerous they, in conjunction with the planning authority, can have them rescinded.
What protection for Bishop's Castle then?
To my knowledge none of the above points has been mentioned in press coverage, but rather a general assertion that residents are making a fuss about nothing.
Mr H Round
Bishop's Castle
