GASIFIER: Magnificent park will benefit village

Have your say

In response to MJ Reid’s letter: “Incinerator – they did not listen or read the info.”

The criticism of (planning chairman) Roger Gambba Jones is totally unreasonable and shows Mr Reid does not understand the planning process.

There is no basis to the scaremongering in Sutton Bridge that should have been prevented by local councillors but was in fact seemingly encouraged by them.

If the plant exceeds very strict EU minimum health quality standards it has to be shut down by law.

An effective monitoring system will be in place. A plant that is shut down cannot possibly cause a health hazard.

The very best air quality experts in Europe have been employed to set safe minimum air quality standards precisely so as not to cause health problems.

Describing the biomass power plant Energy Park Sutton Bridge are building as an “incinerator” is also grossly unfair. The proposal will cost almost three times the proposed incinerator at King’s Lynn precisely because of the state of the art technology that will be used.

The plant will have to satisfy the experts that it is capable of having emissions that are within EU minimum air quality standards.

Indeed investors of £300million would see their investment go up in smoke if they were not entirely confident of their emissions. That is certainly a very great incentive to ensure they are very exceedingly diligent.

It is also important to put into proper context the vote that took place in Sutton Bridge. Despite enormous scaremongering only 14 per cent of those eligible voted. We all know that only the adamant bother to vote on such issues.

The emissions of a gas power station such as was built in Sutton Bridge are twice those of the proposed plant in Sutton Bridge.

There is of course no suggestion that the gas power station has ever been a health hazard over the very many years it has operated.

Certainly it was embraced by the village, as were the EU funds to create the Wingland Enterprise Park on the basis that it was to be a “Power park” that would reward all comers with bountiful supplies of cheap electricity.

The only unbelievable fact is that the power station does not supply the Wingland Enterprise Park with any energy nor does it supply the village. Unfortunately both the village and the enterprise park now suffer from electricity shortages that stifle their development.

I can personally confirm that a very large insulation material company was unable to come to the Wingland Enterprise Park because of the energy shortage.

Energy Park Sutton Bridge resolves that problem at a time when it is clear that no government funds will ever be available for such a project.

Energy Park Sutton Bridge is essential to the future prosperity of Sutton Bridge, especially as the power station is being closed down early.

It no longer operates profitably compared to newer gas-fired plants. The plant that Energy Park Sutton Bridge intends to build is truly magnificent and will draw people from miles around to visit it and enjoy the visitor centre.

It will also employ many to build it and many to run it just as it will allow the development of the rest of the land that is to be developed on the Wingland Enterprise Park. All without any dangers to health. How very misguided most of the local councillors of Sutton Bridge have been.

Leslie Dweck

Wingland Enterprise Park