Representation by Christopher Adrian Rose
- Date submitted
- 16 June 2024
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
CORY CARBON CAPTURE SCHEME OBJECTION Chris Rose (redacted) I object to Cory’s ‘de-carbonisation’ scheme as currently proposed. In my opinion, Cory’s claim that it will enlarge the nature reserve is disingenuous, and should be enough of itself to get this application thrown out. In reality, it is playing what I consider to be a cynical game of pass-the-parcel to try and distract attention from the fact that it will deliver a NET LOSS of space for wildlife on a Site of Metropolitan Importance for Nature Conservation, and Metropolitan Open Land, that is one of London’s best wildlife areas. It is seeking to rebrand an adjacent piece of land that has already been tarted up as part of a previous ‘mitigation’ scheme, whilst destroying land that was set aside as part of the Crossness Nature Reserve to allegedly ‘offset’ the damage done by the expansion of Thames Water’s sewage works. To allow this development at this location will make a mockery of any claims that the planning system/process has anything to do with biodiversity conservation. In fact, it is seriously skewed in favour of pandering to ever more human demand, and against other species. Cory should not be allowed to trash 11% of a designated Nature Reserve and substantial area of SMINC and MOL – doing yet more environmental damage in the area, in order to fix another environmental problem of its own making – with what is unproven technology. Much of the wider Erith Marshes area was still intact up to around 1966 when Bexley Council was created. On its watch a huge proportion of it has now been built all over. Given how good it is for wildlife now, one can only weep at what must have been lost in that time. There should be a permanent ban on any more ‘development’ here, especially as the likes of Cory seem to think that they can just keep taking over ever more land here. Cory has already destroyed one of only three nesting sites for red-listed Skylark in the Borough. Sacrificed for a scheme that it has now junked. The Local Nature Recovery Strategy process is belatedly getting underway for London. We should be starting off with a commitment to 100% protection for what have already been identified and designated as our best existing wildlife sites, not sacrificing them to the likes of Cory, otherwise the whole process is flawed from the outset. The Lawton review of 2010 found that bigger, better- connected sites were more effective for conservation. In the Bexley / inner Thames estuary context, Erith Marshes is such a site. The government has committed to 30x30 - protecting 30% of land and sea for nature by 2030. I believe that Bexley should follow suit, and not ‘offshore’ such responsibilities to other jurisdictions. According to recently published information from Greenspace Information for Greater London, Bexely’s SINCs make up 26.4% of the Borough. Given the Council’s planning committee’s predilection for voting in favour of every application to build on a SINC that comes before it, and the fact that 80% of such sites do not have a management plan to protect and enhance their biodiversity in place (which are the council’s stated aims) then we cannot claim to be at 30x30 in Bexley in any meaningful sense. This is another reason why Cory’s scheme should be rejected. Either that or to admit that all these biodiversity policies / pronouncements are nothing more than a pile of elaborate greenwash. It is not clear that Cory have taken other land supply options seriously. Not too many months ago a large parcel of land by the river, on the east side of Crabtree Manorway North, had been vacated and cleared. I presume that Cory could pipe CO2 to another nearby site for processing. I support global NET NEGATIVE. I believe that emissions need to be cut harder and faster than at present. That new sources of emissions should be avoided. There is a global and national biodiversity crisis. The best and cheapest way to soak up carbon is to restore and NOT destroy nature. CCS is not proven at scale and many schemes have not delivered cuts in emissions. Some, by using the burial of carbon to push out the dregs of oil and gas in near-life-expired fossil fuel fields, have led to an increase in emissions. I suggest that instead of spending millions on CCS, Cory should be funding pathways to a true zero waste economy, including the development of alternative materials to those it is now incinerating that can be wholly re-used and recycled at ‘end of use’ life and finding other ways to dispose of ‘legacy’ waste than landfill or burning (an obviously linear process that Cory never-the-less promotes as ‘renewable’ energy generation). Instead of CCS plant, Cory should fund large scale insulation retrofitting and heat-pump installation for residential properties in Bexley and Greenwich. This would have a number of benefits / paybacks including the ongoing removal of CO2 emissions over many years – hopefully well beyond the lives of Cory’s incinerator plants, creating lots of local jobs, enabling bulk purchase of kit – potentially contributing to a wider reduction in heat pump costs and increasing the disposable income of local people, leaving them with more cash to spend in the (local) economy. I won’t repeat all the detail about protected and priority species, as I know that others will adequately cover that, but significant loss of habitat for them is one of my main concerns in respect of this application On a personal note, I am Volunteer Site Manager for a SMINC/Green Belt wetland by Thames Road in Crayford. I routinely donate 400 hours a year of unpaid work to this. ‘My’ fellow volunteers give further tens of hours. I am heartily sick and tired of our endeavours being more than 100% undermined by continuous attacks on Bexley’s best wildlife sites, which keep on being approved. This is de-wilding and Biodiversity Net Loss. In the 21st century. I have often visited Crossness NR, but if the Cory scheme is approved, then it may become yet another site that I no longer go to, as the wrecking of these places is just plain depressing, and I don’t need frequent reminders of that. Chris Rose (full name Christopher Adrain Rose). BSc (Hons), MSc.