Wrong Technology

Rose Energy contend that there is only one viable technology available to address the waste disposal problems of the poultry industry. There is a sense in which they have to say that, because they can only justify the choice of the Glenavy site if that assertion is true.

CALNI contend that there are several alternatives. All are small scale distributed solutions. None require the massive single location installation proposed by Rose Energy. Some alternatives are only viable when applied in co-operation with other industries, such as beef and dairy farming. Some work best in conjunction with the disposal of domestic waste. However, the most suitable alternative technology that can be applied to a co-operative of poultry farms is Pyrolysis.

On 20th September, CALNI submitted a detailed report on the use of Pyrolysis for the treatment of poultry waste. This paper sets out an informed comparison of Pyrolysis and Incineration and details the advantages of Pyrolysis over the Rose Energy proposal. In doing so it challenges the validity of the their conclusion that

“there is no viable alternative option, or current tested technology, to that proposed by Rose Energy for the use of poultry bedding as a bio-mass fuel in the production of energy in a single power plant.”

The significance of our challenge is that it builds upon the assertions of the document ‘PROTECTING THE FUTURE – A Response to Rose Energy’ submitted to the Planning Service by Professor Sir George Bain, Ms Aileen Smyth, BL and I on 24th September 2008. As paragraph 6.1 of that document pointed out, PPS 2 requires that the Department, before granting planning permission, must be satisfied that

“there are no alternative solutions. This means that the Department will consider whether there are, or are likely to be, suitable and available sites, which are reasonable alternatives for the proposed development, or different, Page 2 of 2 practicable approaches which would have a lesser impact. Applicants should demonstrate that they have fully considered alternative solutions.”

This paper gives details of a different, practicable approach which will have a lesser impact on the environment and economics of Northern Ireland.

Click here to read the full report

This entry was posted in Publications and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

Comments are closed.