Gorse Hill Labour

A regular blog and updates from Mike Cordingley, Councillor for Gorse Hill Ward in Trafford – Gtr Manchester.

GorseTalk Posts

Barton BioMass Powerstation continued

I’m sure the Breathe Clean Air Group opposed to the proposed woodburning biomass powerstation will not mind me reusing a video they’re hosting on their website.

A picture is worth a thousand words and this could be the smoke emission coming over Lostock and Gorse Hill if the powerstation comes into operation.

4 thoughts on “Barton BioMass Powerstation continued

  1. I think it’s a great shame that Councillor Cordingly is siding with this opposition group against the renewable power plant proposal. The scheme has many merits.

    I also think Councillor Cordingly has jumped the gun. The planning application has not even been submitted by Peel yet! Does Councillor Cordingly know more than the rest of us?

  2. Nick,

    Thank you for your response. However I think you’re overstating my position as I’ve not yet declared whether I’m for or against the proposed plant. Nor have I met with either Peel or Opposition groups.

    You’re correct that the planning application has not yet been submitted. However, I feel you are wrong to imply that opening the debate is in anyway jumping the gun. We are in fact in the pre-planning consultation period, facilitated by Peel Energy. The period of consultation after plans submission is always quite short so it seems to me entirely right that people are joining in active debate now. As an elected councillor, I very much see my role as broadening and airing the debate and this website is testament to how seriously I take that role. I know and regret that so many councillors seem to have the idea that it’s dangerous to put issues in front of the public unless it’s in such a prescribed and managed fashion that it’s impossible to make any constructive input.

    Whilst I have not met with opposition groups I have received many emailed letters to which I’ve replied individually and recommended that they feed into Peel Energy’s consultation. I very much recommend that you do too, if you have not already done so.

    And whilst I have not declared on one side or the other, I will be quite candid about my starting position. Trafford’s air quality is significantly below average. (Download Trafford’s Health Profile) It seems irrefutable that if Trafford’s air quality is poor, the air of Trafford Park and around the M60 and A56 (ie Gorse Hill) will be worse. Our life expectancy is also significantly worse than the leafier parts of Trafford. Now I’ve seen it argued on Urmston.net that given the air quality is so poor, it will not make any difference to have this plant in this proximity. I take completely the opposite view, that ideally such plants should be placed where the air quality is exceptionally good. So I’m perhaps setting a very high bar in respect of whether I should be in favour of this plant but a high bar doesn’t mean it can’t be jumped. Show me that the net effect on air quality will be zero or better. Make the case and I will listen and I will air your points of view.

    Finally you have questioned whether I know more than the rest of us. I am certain that I don’t and isn’t that the key point? Do you want decisions to be taken by councillors with officers behind closed doors? There are many councillors who quite frankly never open their mouths, ears or eyes and run away from or ignore any public debate. I hope I’m never accused of the same. If the plant has merits, promote them, but please don’t accuse me of jumping the gun if I’m provoking debate.

    Best wishes

    Mike Cordingley

  3. Thanks for the reply Councillor.

    I apologise if I had an erroneous impression that you are campaigning against the plant. I appreciate the views you hold on air quality and that is something that Peel will need to address in their planning submission obviously.

    However, I saw a story about the proposal in the Trafford Metro today (page 3) and the picture it has of the plant is not the same as the one you have on this site. A bit of further investigation shows that Peel unveiled the newer image at the public meetings they held back in July. I can understand that the Breathe Clean Air Group want to show the oldr image on their website from where you lifted the image but it is inaccurate. And deceptive by Breathe Clean Air Group in my opinion. I think you should get the newer image from Peel’s website.

    It also irks me that anti-energy groups always use children in photos to promote their cause – see the Metro again. Can you imagine the uproar if Peel or any other energy/construction developer etc used shots of kids as part of their literature or campaigns?

    Finally, the video of a plant bellowing smoke/steam is, in my opinion, scaremongering. I don’t believe you would find a video of any modern power station (no matter what the fuel) in the UK like that.

    Obviously I do support this renewable energy proposal as I do all other considered lower carbon schemes in this country. We need more electricity and it should come from renewable sources wherever possible.

    Regards

    Nick Wild

  4. Further apologies Councillor. Just had a look at the other story you have about the proposal and it is the newer image version of the plant. The protest group should change the image they show.

    Regards

    Nick Wild

Comments are closed.