Closure of Tyne Dock 2

The expansion of the Port of Tyne Biomass Facility

If the biofuel protest lobby in the US and Canada get their way this source of biomass will dry up and we upset Mr Putin the sources in Siberia will stop tomorrow but that is for the people who invest in the Port of Tyne to worry about.

What is of concern for some residents are the consequences of the expansion which required the lengthening of River Quay and the closure of Tyne Dock.

One in particular is the displacement of a ship repair to a primarily residential area across town.

Closure of Tyne Dock 1

£180m development being done under the radar.

What we do know is that the Port of Tyne could not expand their Biomass Handling Facility ST000314 until they had extended extended their River Quay to join up with the site of the new silos, former Mcnulty’s yard ST019913.  Two inconveniences that would of held up the expansion plans appear to have been fixed with the aid of South Tyneside Council:-

  • There was no mention in the application, nor any protest by UK Docks who leased the Tyne Dock slipway from the Port of Tyne. The business has been relocated to a residential area without any public consultation. For much more see the shed. That there are more suitable places on the Tyne and the Wear is not considered a planning matter by the Planning Office of STC . . .
  • the loss of Readhead’s Landing is probably more significant in the long run because basically the Planners have taken it from the people and given it to the Port of Tyne.

Three looks at the Expansion of the Port of Tyne Biomass Plant.

    1. The Port of Tyne is to invest £180m to develop infrastructure and new facilities to handle the import of wood pellets from North America for Drax power station, which is converting to biomass.eemlogoComprehensive report in Energy and Environment Management, January 25th 2013

    2. The bonfire of insanity: Woodland is shipped 3,800 miles and burned in Drax power station. It belches out more CO2 than coal at a huge cost YOU pay for… and all for a cleaner, greener Britain!
      • Drax Power Station in Yorkshire is switching from coal to biomass pellets
      • The wood for the pellets is transported from North Carolina, U.S.
      • Drax is swapping to pellets as it is deemed ‘carbon neutral’

      If the biofuel protest lobby in the US and Canada get their way the America’s source of biomass will dry up and if we upset Mr Putin any more than we have already have , the sources in Siberia will dry up even quicker. For both the people who invest in the Port of Tyne and the people who care about the environment, this should be an issue . . . . .

    3. Beauty of Biomass

      08 Mar 2012
      Wood pellets need dry storage and lots of it

      Wood pellets need dry storage and lots of it

      Green and virtuous, biomass offers some handling challenges, as Felicity Landon finds out

      As power generators look to biomass as a vital ‘green’ ingredient, for co-firing with coal or firing on its own, many ports see potential big business on the horizon.Logically, ports that have traditionally been part of the supply chain serving coal-fired power stations would be expected to take up the opportunities. But therein lies a problem, or several problems – including dust, risk of fire and/or explosion, and the need for significant areas of covered storage and specialised handling systems.

Nuisance at Tyne Slipway

Nuisance_at_Tyne_Slipway

To: “concerns@HSE.gsi.gov.uk” <concerns@HSE.gsi.gov.uk>
Sent: Monday, 10 March 2014, 15:27
Subject: Nuisance at  Tyne Slipway

Gary,
I understand you spoke to my wife earlier today re nuisance at Tyne Slipway.
As well as unacceptable levels of noise from around 8.00 a.m. at one point an operative began to dismantle a fibre glass speed boat in the open yard using what appeared to be an angle grinder. This added to the noise but also created fibre glass dust which was not contained. This activity took place less than 30m from residential properties in Harbour View.
When I challenged the behaviour I was told (by somebody senior on the site) that it was an industrial site and I should expect this sort of thing. I stated thata this was in fact a residential area and we intended to do everything in our power to protect our rights.
He told me to ‘ring the council’ in a tone that indicated that in his opinion the authorities were powerless and our rights were unimportant.
I attach a screen shot from some video footage of the aforesaid unacceptable activity (the file size means I can’t send the footage itself)

I’d be grateful if you could confirm receipt and indicate the action that you intend to take.

Kind regards
Dave

One Law for Gypsies another for UK Docks

From: Evelyn
Subject: Re: A dailymail.co.uk article regarding breaking planning
Date: 8 March 2014 13:12:48 GMT

Dear M -in my conversation with Peter Cunningham recently he agreed that the structure is taller and wider than the one which had permission. However he said there  was not enough difference in which to enforce removal etc. He also stated that his department would ensure that all of the neighbours were informed if further planning permission was sought. He also informed me that the MOD contract was for small vessels i.e. Navy patrol boats and canoes etc from Army and that no steel work would be carried out.
However even though our conversation was pleasant enough  – my fears are not allayed   regards Evelyn
Continue reading One Law for Gypsies another for UK Docks