Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
@Bodruncie
Why do you think it's highly likely the Welsh government will hear the case? This is my first time seeing through a planning application, so this is a genuine question.
Thanks!
Wow, great researched post as always OHS.
I'm skeptical about 1. - at the end of the day, the local council wanted the planning permission granted and it seems to be in response to that revelation that the RSPB got in touch with Welsh ministers to call it in. As far as I understand it, ministers are then required to call it in and check if it is of national rather than local significance. Furthermore, the letter that the council received didn't prevent planning officers from rejecting the permission - only from approving it. It therefore stands to reason that they weren't planning to reject it, else they'd have gone ahead with the meeting and rejected it.
2. and 3. are more troubling to me, and I can totally understand why there might be concern about that power cable. If a full EIA would be required for the cable, that suggests to me that it might not go ahead, or if it does it could be several years before we see any power purchase agreement. That would certainly be a shame. However, I think the power cable is only being screened at the moment and doesn't have any bearing on the planning permission being sought at the moment. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I have no answer for question 4. I may look into that more when I get time.
I'm unsure about 5. and its impact on SAE/MeyGen, but I know there are several people who read these forums who are knowledgeable about tidal stream technology, so hopefully someone else can chip in. I'm glad that tidal is looking more viable though, regardless of whether or not the spoils go to SAE.
I will personally be holding for now - I think the planning permission is likely to come through and I will keep an eye on the environmental permit. I sincerely hope that the regular contributors all keep posting and sharing though, regardless of current sentiment - I find your insights and research invaluable.
I can't work out if that's good news for us or not. On the one hand, SAE's conversion of UPS will lead to more emissions, which seems contrary to their plans, but on the other hand, it's surely infeasible for them to switch directly to (true) renewables without some kind of transition. Repurposing existing energy infrastructure would seem appropriate for a transition to me.
Interestingly, in the BBC story that is based on the press release noisyboy linked to (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-55985367) they explicitly mention "making steel at Port Talbot without burning coal". If their main focus is weaning themselves off of coal then we may yet be on to a winner...
And Meygen was mentioned several times. From what I gather, tidal streams don't look likely to get their own sub-pot in R4 of the CfDs though? It's a huge shame as it would really bring the sector to life. It would be revolutionary for SAE if they could secure a CfD for its tidal division...
Environmental Audit Committee on tidal and whether it should be included in the next round of CfDs:
https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/e7ef8ba0-418b-4b9d-9eff-9590f128135d
hahaha. To be fair, I think there's a bit of a difference between a parish council and a city council?
Thanks OT, that's helpful. Reading, that, it doesn't seem to me to be all that likely that this application will be 'called in'. Planning Policy Wales was referenced in that document so I had a look (https://gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2019-02/planning-policy-wales-edition-10.pdf) and there are two points which I think are interesting.
1) SAE's proposal does facilitate a transition away from fossil fuels, which would be in line with that policy document (pg88)
2) I'm pretty sure the pellets are counted as renewable (even though I wouldn't use that term myself - I consider them a transition fuel)
In the 'Calling in Planning Applications document (that OT linked to), it gives 6 examples of reasons they might call an application in. The only one other than PPW conflicts that seems plausibly relevant is the one about substantial controversy beyond the immediate locality. I would be surprised however if there is "substantial" opposition to UPS outside of the local area.
On a separate note, it's quite uplifting to see so much focus on climate change in the Planning Policy Wales document - it quite surprised me.
I see. So if you oppose a planning application, you wait to see which way you think it's going to go, and if it looks like it's not going your way, you appeal to the national government in a last-gasp attempt to get it rejected. It seems like this is absolutely nothing to be concerned about then.
hmmm... Rereading that letter (here: https://twitter.com/BlueflushUK/status/1356928052568145920) it says:
"I issue this Direction to enable further consideration to be given to whether or not the application should be referred to the Welsh Ministers for their determination.
"The Direction prevents your Authority only from granting planning permission; it does not prevent the Authority from continuing to process or consult on the application. Neither does it prevent the Authority from refusing planning permission."
I read that as saying that the planning application can still be refused locally, but not approved locally. In other words, the Welsh government haven't stopped it because they're worried it might be rejected, they've stopped it because it might be approved. Have I got that right?
Sorry, please could you explain Matml? What makes you think it's highly unlikely that they won't approve it? Do you mean that you think the planning committee were going to reject it and the Welsh government intervened to stop them rejecting it?
Just seen this:
https://twitter.com/BlueflushUK/status/1356928052568145920
Thanks Pictorious. I find it difficult to believe that this could be rejected on anything other than political grounds - there was a lot of backlash (and rightly so) about the decision to allow the Cumbria coal mine to reopen and I wonder if that's on the Welsh government's minds. For UPS, given that the power station is already built, it's hard to see how it could be rejected on the basis of the construction of the silos and railway upgrades. I seem to remember that the estimate for the peak HGV usage was only about 26 journeys (13 return) per day?
I won't claim to have a great understanding of these processes though...
From what I've read about environmental permits, I understand that the decision has to be made almost entirely on the basis of the rules/laws. That is, if SAE can demonstrate that they can meet the environmental regulations (BATs and so on) then NRW can't deny them the permit.
Does it work similarly for planning, or is there more room for planning officers' and councillors' preferences? Can national government just step in and overrule the local planning authorities?
Thanks Dan.
I think the page is here, for anyone else looking for it: https://democracy.newport.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=132&MId=7951&Ver=4&LLL=0
National government stepped in? Please could you link?
Hmmm... I can't speak for OT and OHS, but I can assure you that I am not either of those people - this is my one and only account on here. I don't have the time or inclination to be making and posting from multiple accounts.
I think there's an important place for scrutiny and critique of a company on a board like this Scouts, but I don't really see what the benefit of having a go at me is. If you were to check my (very short) post history on here, you'd see I've had as many skeptical posts as positive posts.
OHS -
Oh, I see. That's good to know. So it still seems likely that we will have the draft decision in March?
I have to keep reminding myself that these applications are complex for all companies and that the procedure is probably very rarely smooth. I've never followed an EP or planning application before.
It's easy to get spooked by language in official letters, but I suppose that at this stage SAE will do anything practicable to make sure they get the permits and approvals they need - even if it stretches the budget slightly to meet unexpected conditions and requirements.
Thanks for replying OHS
Yeah, questions 13 - 15 are just "confirm" and "clarify" questions which, in the best case, could be solved with a 3 line email confirming and clarifying. Rereading them, it seem very possible they might not be any cause for concern.
https://documents.newport.gov.uk/PublicAccess_LIVE/SearchResult/RunThirdPartySearch?FileSystemId=PL&FOLDER1_REF=20/0748
I'm a bit concerned by the letter titled NRW updated response 20.1.21:
"We have significant concerns with the proposed development as submitted. We recommend you should only grant planning permission if you attach the following conditions to the permission. Otherwise, we would object to this planning application."
^^ This paragraph is quite concerning. Would anyone with more knowledge about planning laws be willing to comment on the conditions attached and how reasonable and practical they are?
I also note that on page 3 paragraph 2 it says:
"a decision on the [environmental] permit application is unlikely to be made before May 2021 due to the PS awaiting further
information from the applicant regarding technical permitting matters."
So we're not expecting an EP decision until at least May :/
I thought it was likely to be the further technical clarifications email that Dr Poole just dropped
https://publicregister.naturalresources.wales/Search/Results?SearchTerm=PAN-008534&sortBy=Date&filters%5BLocation%5D=&filters%5BLocalAuthority%5D=&SortRelated=Date
Unfortunately, I don't have the technical expertise to say whether or not the clarifications he's requesting are concerning, although I don't think his tone is particularly ominous.