Waste wood pyrolysis plant approved in Wales

Warrington-based developer Sunrise Renewables appealed the council's decision and was granted planning consent by the Planning Inspectorate last week (July 2) for the 9MW scheme, despite concerns raised by Friends of the Earth over emissions and feedstock issues.

The application was originally submitted to the council in September 2008 and refused in July 2009, due to issues over the effect of the development on the character and appearance of the area and the impact of the proposal on the living conditions of nearby residents.

Sunrise Renewables then lodged an appeal with the Inspectorate in January 2010 before permission was finally granted for the scheme.

The developer can now erect a new industrial building and install the wood-fuelled renewable energy plant at the site on Woodham Road, Barry, in South Glamorgan, but has been restricted to processing 72,000 tonnes of waste wood per annum.

The planning inspector, Anthony Thickett, noted that Sunrise wishes to process around 216
tonnes of waste wood per day, which would be chipped elsewhere, and to store around three days worth of supply on-site. The woodfuel will be manufactured from clean wood, pallets, and wood taken from construction and demolition.

Friends of the Earth was present at the appeal inquiry and voiced concerns that treated timber and wood contaminated by plastics would find its way into the feedstock. However, Mr Thickett claimed that while he notes its concerns, emissions will be controlled by the Environmental Planning Regulations.

Sunrise has claimed that there will be eleven deliveries each day by road to the plant, which will take place between seven am and seven pm Monday to Saturday and eight am four pm on Sundays.

Locally sourced

In terms of feedstock, Mr Thickett claims that Sunrise Renewables has proposed that the operation would use waste wood sourced locally, however, does not want to be tied to only using feedstock from the South East Wales region in order to avoid supply problems.

Commenting on this, Mr Thickett said: “I am persuaded by the appellant's argument that the cost of transportation will weigh towards the use of local material but acknowledge that, without a condition, it cannot be guaranteed.”

Heat

According to the planning document, there are no firm proposals at this time to utilise the heat generated by the pyrolysis process, but Sunrise Renewables will seek to market the heat as soon as there is certainty regarding supply.

Quoting the main reasons for granting permission for the project, Mr Thickett said: “Local residents may wish otherwise but the site lies in an industrial area. The council conceded at the Inquiry that it had no objection to the appearance of the proposed building.

“Looking down from Dock View Road the new building would be seen in the context of the development within the Docks and, in my view, would sit comfortably in its industrial surroundings.”

He added: “I conclude, therefore, that the proposal would not have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area.”

“Disappointing”

The planning inspector also accepted a call from Sunrise Renewables to be able to claim costs from the council for the time spent dealing with the application.

Commenting on the decision, Rob Thomas, head of planning and transportation at the Vale of Glamorgan council, said: “It is clear to me that the Inspector felt that there were controls that can be put in place to allow the development to proceed and accordingly allowed the appeal. This is not unexpected, as the process is controlled by a separate permitting regime.

“The Inspector did not consider that there was a need for a Section 1096 legal agreement and also did not consider that the proposal would impact upon the redevelopment of the waterfront. He went further and has made an award of costs against the council given that the reasons for refusal could not be substantiated or evidenced.”

He added that in defending the council's position, his officers did however respond to the application for costs by indicating that much time was spent at the Inquiry dealing with concerns of Friends of the Earth and other individuals'hich the council was not party to and should not bear the associated costs.

“However the Inspector took a firm line on this matter and concluded that this time spent dealing with third party interests was as a direct consequence of the refusal of permission and as a result has made a full award of costs”, said Mr Thomas.

He added: “Whilst the decision to allow the appeal and to award costs is disappointing, it is not however unexpected. What is however disappointing is that the Inspector has awarded full costs against the council, even though a number of the issues responded to by the appellant were not issues raised by this council.”